Article 1776 of rec.music.synth:
Path: ulowell!dandelion!necntc!husc6!ut-sally!ghostwheel!milano!bruns
From: bruns@milano.UUCP
Newsgroups: rec.music.synth
Subject: synth summary #2 (long)
Message-ID: <5564@milano.UUCP>
Date: 11 Nov 87 18:56:03 GMT
Sender: bruns@milano.UUCP
Organization: MCC, Austin, TX
Lines: 2725
Posted: Wed Nov 11 12:56:03 1987
Greetings,
About 6 months ago I posted a summary of synthesizer
synthesizer comments from this newsgroup. In the months
since, there have been lots of good reviews and plenty
plenty of requests for comparisons. As a result, I've
compiled a new summary, which is included below.
Please note that the summary is quite long, and in order
to make it as short as possible, I removed some information
from the postings:
o all signature information except the author's name
o article sections not dealing with synthesizers
To make it easier to access the file, I've added headers
to the top of each article. Each article has one or more
header of the form:
##
This file only includes reviews of synthesizers and synthesizer boxes
(i.e., synths without keyboards). It does not contain information
about drum machines, music software, or effects boxes.
Many thanks to the authors of some excellent reviews: Marc Webster,
Mitch Wood, Christopher Chow, Marc Webster, Kent Sandvik, Marc Visnick,
Nick Rothwell, and others. Apologies to those whose reviews I
accidentally mangled or whose names I accidentally deleted.
Glenn Bruns
MCC, Software Technology Program
arpa: bruns@mcc.com
uucp: {seismo,harvard,gatech,pyramid}!ut-sally!im4u!milano!bruns
---------------------------------------------------------
## Emu Emax
I saw some of the first units at the NAMM show in Chicago in June,
and as I reported on the net at that time, I was very impressed.
I'm sure many keyboard layers/synthesists have lusted after
some of the great sounds on the Emulator II and the EMAX seems
to put the capabilities of the former instrument into a more
cost effective package. According to the EMU representatives,
a couple of the boards on the Emulator II were re=packaged into
a single custom IC chip, which has yielded the EMAX, a poor man's
Emulator II!
Regarding the specifications of the EMAX, the Emulator II supposedly
uses a proprietary data encoding scheme that squeezes 14 bit-equivalent
sound out of an eight-bit machine. The propaganda that EMU is spreading
about the EMAX claims that the EMAX uses a proprietary scheme to
squeeze 12 bit equivalent sound out of an eight bit machine.
(The prophet 2000 and the new AKAI S-900 both are 12-bit machines.)
Well, I guess all this stuff about whether or not something is really
12-bit, 8-bit or whatever went out the window for me when I heard
one of the first PRODUCTION examples of the EMAX about a month
ago at the GUITAR SCHACK store in downtown Chicago. The 10 sound
disks supplied with the unit (which are provided free with each machime
sold) are absolutely beautiful. The grand piano disk sounds more
realistic than Ensonique's new sampling grand instrument, to my ears.
The human voices are stunnning. The drum kit samples can be directly
applied to any Art of Noise/ Janet Jackson type rhythm track
you wish to copy; expieriencing some of the snare panning
percussion-stereo effects are truly innovative.
As opposed to the library of sounds that Sequential provided
for the prophet 2000 when that instrument was first released,
the 10 disks supplied with each EMAX will be enough to keep
anyone interested for quite awhile. The kicker is that EMU
is due out with 40 more disks within the next month; They are
also working to convert a good percentage of their Emulator II
library for use with the EMAX.
The EMAX does have individual outputs for each of its eight voices;
so, you can get at the snare, etc. separately for external processing,
or you can use the system for 16 and 24-track work as a drum machine,
etc.
In Chicago, the keyboard version of the EMAX is selling for
the retail price of $2895.00, no discounts! The rack mount version
has not been officially released.
I have been told by one salesman that supplies of the EMAX are limited
at the moment. Production of the EMAX at EMU was held up due to
a fault that was found in the integrated sequencer software. Apparently
one voice was playing out of tune. This fault has been fixed via
a software update. Also, supplies of one of the EMAX's chips have been
slow in coming, which has also delayed production.
I was not too happy with the sequencer in the EMAX, however. There are
no auto-correction facilities, and it was not immediately apparent
how a song could be WRITTEN in the machine; I want to link sequences
that serve as verse, chorus, bridge, etc. to form a song but
it is not apparent to me how this can be done. The sequencer also
has a "download" capability that can store sequences from advanced
sequencer software packages, but I am not sure of the details of this
feature, either.
I ordered my keyboard version EMAX a few months ago, but my unit
has not come in yet. I am amxious to swap sound disks with
other Emax owners later on. Please lt me know if anyone
is interested.
Bob Neumann
## Emu Emax
Well, I've owned my new EMU EMAX sampling keyboard for about a week
now, and I thought I'd share some of my first impressions of the instrument
with everyone;
I've reviewed the instrument a while back on the net, so I won't
go into a lot of detail on the specifications, etc. There is a good
review in Keyboard magazine this month -you might want to read it if you
are not familiar with the EMAX.
Currently, EMU provides the following disks free with the unit:
Grand Piano (sounds just as nice as the comparable E-II disk,
EMU claims its a Bosendorfer; I'm not sure)
Arco Strings: Some nice string sounds, but they don't strike me as
well as the E-II; I'll be sampling my ARP String Ensemble to
hopefully make up for the difference; (no I'm not crazy, I happen
to luv the sound of my ARP -otherwise known as Solina (by Eminent)in
Europe). The sequencer has a nice portion of "La Primavera".
Kyodi Synth Collage: FAT midi'd keybords, sounds like combinations
of digital percussive voices (ala DX-7) and analog chords
(ala Oberheim). Great for doing covers of Mr. Mister songs, etc.
Nice sequencer riffs;
Mixed Chorus, Synth strings: The beautiful Emulator II female and Mixed
vocal chorus samples; also, some synth string sounds that are
usable, more on the "mellow" side. Demo seguencer patterns
include the Stones' "Can't Get" and a more classical-sounding
piece called "Tristan 1986".
Rock Organ: A great hammond B3 and some bass sounds. They do not include
a sample of a B3 with a FAST SPINNING leslie, but they do include
"chorused" versions of the sample, done with the EMAX's analog
processing functions. Demo sequencer pattern "Argent";
French Horn Section: Nice horn sounds, with some special efx. Demo sequencer
pattern: "video horns"; includes the theme from Dallas.
Big Brass/Cymbal Crash: Bigger horn sounds; More excellent horns (which
are very useful;) Demo sequencer patterns: "Sledgehammer" and
"2001", complete with the tympani hits for the 2001 sequence.
Marimba/Vibes: good sampled percussive voices, including special efx
versions of the sounds processed through the analog and digital
filtering sections.
Rock Kit: Great guitar and various drum sounds;
Lead/Rhythm Guitar: power chords and lead sounds for the keyboardist
who wants to believe in his mind that he is actually a guitar player;
More drum sounds, too;
The demo sequence includes somthing called "Hendrix 1986"
which is the "Star Spangled Banner" played with all the pitch bending,
etc. of the original performance; Pretty cute for a demo;
My impressions of the manual:
It's written by Craig Anderton, and is pretty helpful and easy to
understand; Almost too easy, but I guess the writer took into
account the wide range of potential users of the instrument;
Emu tells me that a updated manual is already in the works;
Quirks and potential problems (so far):
There is a note on the inside of the manual that mentions that after touch
pressure is NOT TRANSMITTED by MIDI out, although the instrument itself
performs after touch, and the instrument responds to after touch from
other instruments. I haven't tested this yet myself.
The Marimba/Vibes disk contains operating system 3.0, while all the other
disks contain operating system 2.3. It is the responsibility of the
owner of the instrument to copy the new operating system to the other
disks. The new operating system provides new functions including
a MIDI Analyzer in special mode #6;
The EMAX will not reboot on another operating system if one operating
system is already loaded in via disk unless the machine is power
cycled before the new operating system disk is loaded in. This
is not documented in the manual and caused me a few minutes of frustration
before I discovered this.
For example, I can load in a disk that has operating system 2.3,
then load in a disk with opearting system 3.0, and the machine
will still think it is running on 2.3. The correct method
is to power up the EMAX, load in the desired operating system disk,
and get to work. Of course, if all older disks should have the
new operating system copied to it, so this situation should never occur
again.
I will supply more information/opinions on the instrument as I gain
more experience with it.
I will be sampling a Roland TR-808, my DMX drum machine with all
my extra sounds, orchestral hits, etc. and my other instruments
and am still interested in trading disks with other EMAX users.
Bob Neumann
## Emu Emax
whoa!!! i have had an emax for a few months now and i think it is *quite*
good. i especially like having the analog processing that the ROLAND and
AKAI DO NOT HAVE!! a filter that tracks the keyboard can really help out
when stretching those samples - you need something to remove the sample
clock.
read keyboards review (i believe it was january - maybe february).
the on-board sequencer is great help - you can download from your pc.
as to the "akai sounding better than the emulator it was sampled off of" this
should discredit his whole pitch. this is utter crap and totally impossible.
when is the last time you taped a tape and the dupe sounded better? come on!!
the guy obviously makes more money selling the other unit!! haven't you
ever been to a stereo store and all the salesmen recommend the *same speaker*!!
speakers (among other things) are soooo subjective, i doubt very much that
they all think one brand and model are "the best" unless they mean "best
commission."
sorry for the flame =) but i just had to "help" =) =) =)
disclaimer - i have no reason to recommend the emax over any other sampler,
other than the fact that i think it is best, bang for buck. when software
is available for the kurzweil 150, i may change my opinion. harmonic
additive synthesis is *so* powerful!! i want sample-to-harmonic (read FFT)
software for the beast that would allow me to use my samples on it, yet add
incredible real-time parameters similar to dx's.
John D. Miller
## Korg SG-1D
## Roland MKS-20
There are no "synthesizers" which sound JUST like a piano. The closest
piece which does claim to be a synthesizer is the Kurzweil 250, for around
$10000, but it is really a sampler rather than a synthesizer.
For the most accurate piano sound with a good, weighted 88-key keyboard,
for under $2000, I would recommend the Korg SG-1D which retails for $1700-1900.
However, it has very few sounds (piano and a couple of others) and is not a
synthesizer. Korg does promise more sounds for it in the future.
For more money, the Roland MKS-20 or RD-1000 is the way to go (RD-1000
is about $3000, MKS-20 without keyboard is $1500).
If you're willing to compromise the weighted keyboard and the best
available piano sound, then many options are open. A good choice synthesizer
with a "reasonable" piano sound is the Ensoniq ESQ-1, for about $1300. A
sampler will provide a better piano sound, such as the Ensoniq Mirage ~$1500.
Or perhaps you would be satisfied with a Yamaha TX-7 piano sound. Then
you could get the Yamaha KX-88 (88keys, weighted) for $1400 plus the TX-7 $600,
and have good synth sounds also.
But if I can hear what you want (a very good piano sound), I think
you'll be happier with the Korg SG-1D (or the Roland if you have the extra
$1000) and then add synth sounds with either the TX-7 or a Yamaha FB01 ($300).
I hope this helps.
Dan Ts'o
## Roland MKS-20
In article <861209-100057-3283@Xerox> Webster.Henr@Xerox.COM writes:
>As far as units to check out, Roland has a very good sampled piano
>the MKS-20 for $1700.
Just a quick correction: the Roland is NOT a sampled piano.
[That's why it sounds so good. :-) ] It uses a new, proprietary method
called Structured Adaptive Synthesis (SAS). Every note has 127 different
sounds (one per velocity level) associated with it, making the sound
extremely rich and dynamic. I played one of these instruments for about
15 minutes and was extremely impressed -- and I wasn't even using a
weighted keyboard at the time! I've seen the unit selling for about
$1495 in Pennsylvania.
In fairness, the sounds themselves ARE based on sampled
waveforms.
Dan
## Roland Piano Plus 100/300/400
You may want to take a look at the Roland Piano Plus 100/300/400. I bought
a 300 last year and just love it. It has 76 full size keys with very good key
touch response, a midi interface, 4 piano voices, harpsicord, and vibes with
built in stereo chorus, soft and sustain pedals. They are available in two
versions (a home type and stage type) the home type is alittle less portable
than the stage type. If fact it looks much like a chopped down spinet. However,
the keyboard easily detaches from the base and both can be put into the back seat of a
decent size car without much trouble. The 100 has 2 less voices and 66 keys, while
the 400 has tremolo and 88 keys. The 300 listed for around $1300. but I got mine
for $795. after disounting at E.U. Wurlitzer in Boston.
I believe they have made a key touch improvement since I bought mine and the
model numbers are now 150/350/450.
They don't have any memory downloading capabilities.
Tim Vandawalker
## Yamaha Clavinova
A few months ago I bought a Yamaha
Clavinova CLP-50, for about $2400 Canadian, and I think it's *great*.
I had looked at the Clavinova CVP series in the spring, and almost
bought one, but then I heard that a new model was coming out in the
summer. I waited, and am glad I did.
The CLP-50 uses "Advanced Wave Memory (TM)" to generate the sound. The
sound is based on a sampled grand piano, with several wave forms per
note, and the instrument selects the appropriate one or combination
according to how hard or soft you play the key. The grand piano sound is
*very* convincing. Note that the Clavinova CVP models and the CLP-20
and CLP-30 do NOT use "AWM" technology, but are based on FM synthesis
instead. I found that they didn't sound nearly as "piano-like".
Other features of the CLP-50 are a full 88-key weighted keyboard (as
compared to 76 for the other models). There is no built-in sequencer,
and no voices other than "mellow", "normal", and "bright" piano, but it
has MIDI in & out. (I'm contemplating adding a small synth to my setup
sometime this year.)
At 135 pounds I wouldn't call it portable, but it's still a lot easier
to move than a conventional upright (or a grand!). One negative point
I've found is that the keys are a bit noisy, i.e. if the volume is
quite low, you can hear the keys hitting bottom. This doesn't really
bother me since I play with headphones 90% of the time (at 2 am :-)
I don't know whether Yamaha has brought "AWM" technology to any of the
other Clavinovas since the summer. It's really a completely different
sound from the "FM" Clavinovas.
Doris Kochanek
## Yamaha Clavinova
We at the MIT Media Lab just got 4 Yamaha CLP-50 Clavinovas to play
with. Here's some quick opinions.
Controls:
I dislike the fact that "secret keys" are used to control almost every
aspect of the piano. Frinstance: Hold the lowest two white keys and
every time you smack a key in the third octave the piano tunes up 4
cents. So some composer is bound to write a piece which retunes the
piano during the song. Things like MIDI mode and channel numbers are
controlled by pushing one of the sound keys (like bright or mellow)
and one of the piano keys. MIDI channel is a certain 16 note range on
the keyboard.
Why not put a real control panel and cover it if it's ugly?
(Seems to me that if anyone is a human factors engineer and speaks
japanese, they could be seriously in need...)
The built in pedals are a bit clunky. Abruptly taking your foot off
goes "thuunk". There is one big plug which goes to the pedals and the
speaker (or amp?).
There is no way provided to send audio out without using the internal
speakers, too. The volume control controls line level and speaker
volume.
Sound:
There is one sound, piano, and it is very good. There are enough
levels of sounds for different impact velocities that it's hard to
tell how many there are. It is digitally stored waveforms, a
significant improvement over the other Clavinovas, which are
algorithmic.
Listening through headphones revealed a slight D/A buzz. Listening to
the internal speakers or through an expensive studio stereo didn't
show this problem. Very slight.
Listening through the internal speakers sounded just a little wrong.
Through the expensive stereo sounded like listening to a piano through
a cheapie stereo. Through headphones sounded well, okay...
When I taped the CLP on a dolby cassette deck, it played back very
fine. Through headphones I really couldn't hear any faults. So the
audio is at least as good as home cassette, and probably not as good
as vinyl or CD.
My friend the pianist said the keys came up a little too fast. Go find
out for yourself, tho.
I think the Yamaha is a serious contender if you want to buy something
like it. I would like, someday, to compare it to sampling synths,
which might present a better deal. But in the mean time, I will be
plunking along on it.
## Korg SG-1D Digital Piano
In the spirit of the recent Ensoniq Digital Piano review...
I just bought a KORG SG-1D Digital Piano on Friday, so I thought
I'd give my impressions.
INSTRUMENT:
88 keys. 75? pounds. List price $2195?, and I paid $1600.
Digitally sampled sound.
SOUND:
There are four preset instrument sounds. They are: grand piano I & II,
and electric piano I & II. In addition there is a slot for ROM cards of new
sampled sounds. I believe currently harpsicord, clavi, guitar/bass, another
electric piano and a harp are available.
The piano sounds are EXCELLENT. Well, actually I won't go that far.
I think they are somewhat better than the Ensoniq and rival the Kurzweil 250
in realism. They, however, do not have the dynamic range of the Kurzweil but
are somewhat better than the Ensoniq in dynamics. The kurzweil in turn is
superior in acoustic realism to the Roland (MKS-20/RD1000) but does not have the
dynamics of the Roland. The Roland has a very funny sounding low end of the
keyboard but is otherwise my favorite because of the tremendous dynamics which
greatly enhance the expressive capabilities. On the other hand, the Roland was
nearly twice the price of the Korg. The Korg has a slightly electronic sounding
decay, sometimes. I thought the Ensoniq had serous problems with buzzing or
noise, perhaps aliasing noise.
The Korg is 12-note polyphonic, the Roland is 16. I haven't noticed
terrible problems with the 12-note limit but I might later. I know that 8 is
far too few. (How can people stand those 6-note synths ?)
Electric piano sounds are fair. Yeah, I won't be playing those sounds
much.
MIDI STUFF:
You can split the keyboard and have one or both halves sound locally
(on the KORG) or other synths via MIDI. You can send program changes and MIDI
pitch bend and mod wheels are provided. Monophonic after touch is also
available and of course velocity, which is range adjustable. In short it is
a pretty good MIDI controller, though not quite as versatile as the Kurzweil
Midiboard ($1800). I have driven a TX-7 and a DW-8000 using splits with
satisfaction.
MISC:
"Stereo" chorusing effect is quite good. Sustain pedal included as well
as a music stand.
THOUGHTS:
The touch is stiff and damped. I found the feel of the Roland and
Ensoniq to be okay but slightly too light and loose for my taste, especially
when try to use the great dynamics of the Roland when soft playing. The Korg
drives the MKS-20 well including soft playing.
Perhaps the best feeling keyboard I've tried is the Kurzweil Midiboard.
However the Midiboard currently suffers from some response problems that I
outlined in a couple previous USENET articles (which caused me to decide
against a Midiboard + MKS-20 combo).
But I like the feel of the Korg keyboard a lot. I haven't tried the
Wersi M-88 which is probably worth seeking out (at only $1100).
I guess I see the Korg as a good interim solution. I can always add
a Roland MKS-20 ($1300, which with the Korg at $1600 is the price of the
RD-1000), later if I want the better dynamics. Or perhaps something better
will come out (undoubtedly) in which case the Korg will probably still be
a fine keyboard to drive the newest sound modules.
I give it a "thumbs up."
## Ensoniq Mirage
I've had my Mirage for about four months and I still am pretty
happy with it. Here is a summary of perceived advantages and
disadvantages.
+ Price. It is still pretty cheap relative to other keyboard
samplers. Try to get the dealer to kick in some sample disks.
Last Fall there was a special promotion in which every Mirage
was shipped with 10 or so sample disks plus the advanced
sampling system (MASOS.)
+ Support. It is reasonably well supported with third party
samples and software. Sample suppliers include K-Muse, MIDImouse,
and Soundware. Support should remain good in the future as
Ensoniq has probably sold quite a few Mirages.
+- Keyboard. I find the velocity sensitive keyboard quite playable.
Other reviewers have found it "springy." It is not weighted.
- Noise. Some distortion can be heard especially for quiet sounds.
+ Programmability. Standard VCF, VCA, EG's are used following
the sample generation stage. All are programmable. The keyboard
can be split into multiple parts and two samples can be layered
(or "mixed.")
+- Sequencer. The 333-note (standard) capacity of the sequencer is
a little small. It make a good scratchpad for ideas -- especially
since those ideas can be saved on a floppy. At least they support
the MIDI clock so sequences can be bounced to other units.
- Roadability. Not robust.
+ Reliability. Pretty good. Early (low) serial numbers should be
shunned as they are rumored to be unreliable.
--
paul drongowski decvax!cwruecmp!pjd
## Akai X7000
I've had my AKAI X7000 for about a month now. I have to tell you that I am
pretty happy with it. It uses 12bit resolution (at max bandwith of 18Khz)
and has plenty of sample time for 6 samples and if you add the AKS70 you
can have 16 samples on the keyboard at once. Of course this guy has its
downfalls to. The disk drive is a 2.8" QuickDisk type, and it is hell trying
to find the disks. They are quite expensive as well. Another flop is that
there is no 'crossfade' capability in this machine. Other than those two
problems, I am in love with its sound capability. Editing is a breeze, the
AUTOLOOP is extremely good for 'simple' voices, but I've had better luck
manually with more complex sounds. The keyboard itself is quite responsive,
and has a positive feel to it. It does lack 'aftertouch'. There is no onboard
sequencer, but got $1495 what do you expect? I give the AKAI X7000 an A, and
hope for upgrades and retrofits.
Mitch Wood (...!akgua!cylixd!fedeva!gmw8868) Thanx for the Review for the EMAX
## Akai X7000
I just bought a sampling keyboard myself. An Akai X7000 which I am quite
pleased with. It has its quirks, but I am very happy with it. It uses 12bit
sampling and has more than 10 sampling rates for different length (and quality)
samples. It cost me just under $1500 and came with a set of quotunquote useable
samples. (Grand Piano included is on 5 disk sides) oh yeah, I almost forgot,
unit uses UNSTANDARD 2.8" diskettes (64k/side) and stores 1 sound/side. There
are 32 user definable configs for the 6 samples allowed on the keyboard. These
can be split at your descretion. An update ~$250 will allow 16 samples on the
keyboard at one time. It is 6 voice poly (which is plenty) and can be a multi-
timbral keyboard using special midi modes. Editing samples is really easy, and
I can find a good looping point in less than 5-6 mins usually (less if it is a
fairly simple sample). Anyway, I like it and except for the silly disks, it was
a good choice for me. (BTW I am primarily a home-studio person) The keyboard is
velocity sensitive, but not pressure (see KEYBOARD March Edition on both the
AKAI and ROLAND S-10/S-50 not sure which)
Mitch Wood @ Federal Express Corp, Memphis, TN.
[..!akgua!cylixd!fedeva!foobar]
## Ensoniq ESQ-1
In article <17389@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> dantso@bach.UUCP (Dan Ts'o) writes:
> Well as the compiler of the recent synth survey said, everybody seems
>to like the synth they bought. So here is a few more bits about the DW-8000
>and the ESQ-1 from a DW-8000 owner.
...and here's a few comments on the ESQ-1 from an ESQ-1 owner...
>It is unfortunate that it doesn't include after touch.
While its true that the ESQ keyboard dosen't include aftertouch, note that
the ESQ can respond to both polyphonic and monophonic aftertouch.
Aftertouch data is one of the 15 modulators which can routed to oscillator
pitch, level, panning, filter freq, etc. Modulation depth is adjustable and
can be either positive or negative.
> Another nit is that the ESQ-1 doesn't have a separate envelope for the
> filter.
But wait there are 4 envelope generators (level-time type, not ADSR) and you
assign one of them to modulate the filter. The only built in restriction
which I don't like about the ESQ envelopes is that DCA4 (the final output
volume) is always modulated by ENV4 (ENV4 can still modulate other stuff
though...)
> The sequencer, while nice, would be redundant for me
> since I am using an IBM PC with librarian and sequencer software.
Actually, its quite convient to have a sequencer on your keyboard.
Although I have a more powerful computer based sequencer (Opcode's) I
usually end up sequencing on both the ESQ and the Mac.
A nice thng about the sequencer is that it allows the ESQ to
be multitimbral. Multitimbral is dynamic, i.e., the only limit is that
at any one time only 8-voices will sound. The ESQ supports midi overflow
modes so an 2 ESQs can be ganged together as an 16 voice machine.
The sequencer also allows you to transmit over midi up to 8 sets of
program change/midi volume messages when you select a sequence.
>While the differences are blurring, I think that FM synthesis (like the
>FB-01, DX-7 and TX-7) and analog-style subtractive synthesis (like the DW-8000
>and the ESQ-1) still offer substantially different enough ranges of sounds
>and timbres that having both types of synths is useful (which is why I have
>both a DW-88000 and a TX-7).
I absolutely agree. Now if the synth store can only get that TX81Z for
me soon...
Christopher Chow
## Roland S-50
!!!FLASH!!! Before you go out and buy that E-Mu EMAX sampling
keyboard ($2,995.00 at Sam Ash), take a look at the Roland S-50 sampling
keyboard ($2,495.00 at Sam Ash).
I went to Sam Ash (Paramus, NJ) earlier this week to buy the EMAX.
However, when I got there the sales guy insisted that I first see the S-50.
I was biased towards the EMAX, but the S-50 by comparison was a killer. In
fact, I had the guy set up the KORG DSS-1, the EMAX and the S-50 side-by-side. We ran them through the same board, at the same levels, with flat EQ
and the same effects (a little SPX-90 reverb). We then loaded comparable
stock samples into each. The first thing that made me take notice was the
Piano. The S-50 made the EMAX sound awful (the EMAX made the Korg sound
awful). The next thing we compared was drums, again the S-50 blew away the
other two. It wasn't long before a crowd gathered around to see this. All
agreed that the S-50 sounded best. I realize that the EMAX has many nice
features, etc. And spec-wise it looks great. However, I walked out with the
S-50 and I can't play it enough.
For anyone interested here are some S-50 specifics:
32 character flourescent display
Standard 5 Octave Keyboard
16 Voice Poliphony
16 Wave Oscillators
16 Amplifiers
16 LFO's
16 8-Stage Envelope Generators
Each envelope can be assigned key follow and velocity for rate variation
Digital High-Pass and Low-Pass Filters
30 seconds of sampling time at 15 KHz
14.5 seconds of sampling time at 30 Khz
Sampling can be triggered by record switch, foot pedal or auto trigger
based on predetermined threshold
16 samples can reside on-board
These can be layered, split, cross faded, assigned to one
of 4 audio outputs and assigned to a specific midi channel.
Cross fade can be gradual or abrupt
Setups are loaded from 3.5 inch floppy disks
Midi out channel is assignable as well as midi in
Sounds great
Furthermore, all the voice editing software you need to create great patches
resides on-board. You can plug an RGB or Composite Video monitor directly
into the back of the keyboard and use wave form displays etc. to edit your
patches. Features include: a VU-type meter for setting record levels; a
graphical display of the sample's amplitude wave form (before and after
editing); an osciloscope which allows you to evaluate sounds in real time
(this comes complete with freeze-frame capability); and much much more.
There is also a port on the back (looks like a computer keyboard
slot to me) which will be used later once Roland comes out with more software.
One other thing, all software updates and new patches are FREE!!! Roland gives
you a card which lets you take a disk to your dealer and copy all the
new stuff as it comes out.
Well, more later. I'm going home to work on taking all those three keyboard
layered sounds I've been using and sample them onto one keyboard.
Mark Tuomenoksa
## Ensoniq ESQ-1
> Can you Ensoniq lovers out there sway me just a little more?
> 1. After-touch - - just how important is this feature anyway? -
I haven't played on a keyboard with aftertouch too much, so I'm not all
that qualifed to answer here, but since I can do monophonic control
through things like the control voltage pedal, I've haven't missed it on
my ESQ. I would say it's nice, but simple mono-aftertouch is not THAT
big of a deal.
> 2. While the best price I could find (in the city) for the ESQ-1
was $1299, The Casio salesman has discounted the CZ-1 to $899.
~$400 dollars makes a big difference to me.
I think this is the key point. You'll get more with the ESQ, but it
also costs more.
3. The Casio seems to have a lot more controls on the keyboard itself
to 'diddle' with. (I know - more bell's and whistles). There doesn't
seem to be as many knobs, buttons, etc on the ESQ-1. Does this mean
that you can't do as much?
The ESQ has a very sophisticated user interface for a machine in the
"around $1000" catagory, and that's why the actual interface looks so
simple (kind of like Bang & Olufson hi-fi equipment are extremely
sophisticated, and therefore can have extremely simple interfaces -- no
I'm NOT comparing the ESQ to B&O, just giving another example). For
example, those 10 keys around the *80 character display* (I'm happy to
see the new DX-7 following suit with an 80 character display rather than
the wimpy 40 charatcer or whatevr is used to be) are actually "soft"
keys, and take on different meaning depending on what is displayed
directly below (or above) each key. That's hip, and it makes for very
easy communication with a fairly complex machine.
Also, something I appresiate about Ensoniq is that their user interfaces
have integrity -- you ever noticed how cheap stereo equipment always
have lots lights and sliders and knobs and arrows and bells and whistles
and words like "Hi-Vicosotiy Ultra-linera Sub-tracker Super-System
15000XQZ" painted in floresent paint (Wow, man, like that looks
hi-tech!). Where as true hi-fi equipment is very simple (like fine
amplifiers have only one knob -- amplitude). Ensoniq refrains from
putting "hi-tech" colors and lights and stuff that some of the less
expensive synth "brighten their box" with, and that gives Ensoniq stuff
a little more "professional" feel. ....just an opinion.
marc webster
## Akai 9000
## Emu Emax
## Roland S-50
> !!!FLASH!!! Before you go out and buy that E-Mu EMAX sampling
keyboard ($2,995.00 at Sam Ash), take a look at the Roland S-50 sampling
keyboard ($2,495.00 at Sam Ash).
Mark,
I very glad you mention that. I have been looking to get a sample in
the next several months and so have been starting to shop around. Last
Fall I walked into the House of Guitars (Rochester, NY) and asked Brian,
"so what's hot in samplers?" and he said, "wait a few weeks until the
new EMAX comes out. It should be a killer" So a come back a few weeks
later and say, "I would like to try the new EMAX" and Brian says, "EMAX
sucks". I say, "huh?" and he says, "Wasn't all it was cracked up to be"
(you kind of have to know Brian).
So I was a little shocked. He said he compared the Roland S-50, the EMu
EMAX and the Akai9000 (all around $2500-$2800) using the Emulator II as
the reference. For example, he sampled percussion sounds from the
Emulator onto each sampler. His results:
Akai 9000 best -- some stuff sounded better on the Akai than on the
Emulator it can from (?) (not quite sure would he meant by
that, exception that the Akai sound very good)
Roland S-50 close second. Almost as good as the Akai
Emu EMAX *distant* third -- just didn't have it.
Well, I figured maybe he was biased, or had an input line to hot by
mistake or something dumb oversight, but I decided to not to get a
sampler right away, and wait until the dust settled a little. Anyway, I
very interested to hear someone else who thinks that EMAX wasn't all it
was cracked up to be. Maybe it's true.
I haven't done any big comparitive listening since I can't afford a
sampler for awhile still, so I can't give any personal opinions. Is
there anybody else who could give some comparitive opinions on these
samplers?
marc webster
## Yamaha DX7II
Here are a few comments on the DX7IIs (beyond describing the new
features that have been well publicized):
1. Packaging, Physical Characteristics
The new DXen are a bit shorter than the old one, considerably lighter
(more plastic?), and have a lower profile (end-on), such that the keys
are higher than the end panels. For this reason I'd be hesitant to
use a DX7 road case for a DX7II.
As has been noted before, the keyboard feels different, perhaps a bit
stiffer. More specifically, the old DX7 keyboard had a noticeably
nonlinear stress-strain curve -- as you pressed a key, there was a
slight "snap" or silent yielding about 2/3 of the travel down. The
DX7II feels more linear. At first I thought I liked the old one
better, but am coming to believe that the new one gives better control
of low and middle velocities, at least for my own cumbersome playing
style.
The DX7IIs are shipped with only a ROM cartridge, music stand, and
owner's manual. No sustain pedal, volume pedal, or RAM cartridge.
I'm not sure what the cartridges sell for, but this probably represents
a hidden price increase of about $150.
Note also that if you were an early DX7 owner, your old foot controller
(FC3?) is incompatible with the newer version (FC7) and will not work
in the DX7IIs.
The buttons which replace (or merely cover) the old-style dome switches
look nice and are easier to press, but this feature has its own cost:
Vigorous playing can rattle the looser of them. It's easily masked by
cranking the volume....
The new backlit LCD display is *much* easier to read. Contrast is
very high at viewing angles likely to be encountered while playing.
Minor complaint: no descenders for lower case letters (g,j,q).
2. Functionality
First observation is that the new DXen emit a "pop" when you switch
power on or off, unlike the DX7 which is nearly silent.
Yes, the sound quality is better. Buzzes and other digital artifacts
are much less evident -- but still there. Listen closely to factory
internal patch 18 (vibes). You'll only hear the crud if the ambient
noise is low (unlikely in a music store).
As promised, controller settings that were part of the DX7's global
"function memory" (aftertouch, mod wheel, foot controller, breath
controller) are now stored with each patch. This is a major win.
There are some new parameters that are associated with "performance
memories", not patch memories. For example, the two sliders (CS1, CS2)
can be linked to nearly any of the voice edit parameters. The footswitch
inputs (FS1, FS2) can be independently applied to the A-voices or B-voices,
and FS2 can be assigned to do any of several things, notably including
"key hold" (sostenuto). But these features come alive only in performance
mode (where you call up a performance memory) -- not when you call up a
single voice like on the DX7.
Some of the performance features, like pan mode (for stereo output) clearly
make sense only in performance mode where you're using two patches. But
I incline to believe that others of them (the list above is not complete)
would be useful in single patch playing, and would better have been placed
in the regular patch memories (though one might want a performance mode
feature to override certain patch memory parameters).
By the way, playing with tuning systems other than equal temperament is
*incredibly fun*. This feature alone is worth the price....
## Casio CZ-1
## Ensoniq ESQ-1
## Korg DW-8000
About 7 weeks ago I posted a request for information about the
Casio CZ 1, the Korg DW 8000 and the Ensoniq ESQ 1. Hereby I would like to
thank everbody who mailed or posted a reply. Your help has proved to be
invaluable. I would definitely have made the wrong choice without the
information I received from you all. Thank you very much indeed !
Apparently, there are more people facing the decision I had to make.
For you, here is a summary of what I found out. If anyone would find
anything incorrect in this summary do not flame me (it is useless anyway:
your flames can't burn my *** ; I am on the other side of the ocean ! ),
but post a correction.
First to clear up the terminology when I say 'voice' I mean a
collection of oscillators capable of producing a monophonic sound.
CASIO CZ 1.
Keyboard : Five octave velocity sensitive and after touch,
split.
Sound : Phase Distortion. A total of 16 oscillators. A voice
can be assigned 1 or 2 oscillators. Making this
instrument a 16 or 8 voice one. Each oscillator can
produce one of 8 possible waveforms, each oscillator has
its DCW (a filter) and a DCA (an amplifier). Each
component of a voice (DCO, DCW, DCA) has its own
envelope generator. Keyboard velocity can modulate any
of the three. Keyborad control voltage can modulate DCW
and DCA.
Memory : 64 presets in ROM, 64 internal writeable patch
locations, optional RAM cartridge with another 64.
Interface : Lots of buttons, a small LCD display with cursor control
buttons and value buttons for input.
Midi : Nice midi implementation. Poly timbrality. Each channel
is statically assigned a timbre and a number of voices.
Specials : A stereo chorus.
Personal : Personally I feel that PD synthesis offers too little
for a synthesizer in this price range.
KORG DW 8000.
Keyboard : Five octave velocity sensitive with after touch.
Sound : 16 oscillators, 2 oscillators per voice. Each oscillator
can produce one of 16 stored waveforms. I don't know
about other features.
Memory : 64 presets and no (?) additional RAM. (I am not sure
about this).
Interface : Don't know much about this either. I do know a data
slider and buttons are used for data input.The operating
system is said to be fair at best.
Midi : NO polytimbrality. Just 8 voice polyphony.
Specials : A digital delay and an arpeggiator.
Personal : Personally I like the sounds. I just wish it was poly
timbral... Digtal delay is nice and useful.
ENSONIQ ESQ 1.
Keyboard : Five octave velocity sensitive. Splits, layering and
layered splits.
Sound : 24 oscillators. 3 oscillators per voice. Each oscillator
can produce one of 32 stored waveforms. Each voice has 3
LFO's, 4 DCA's, a filter and 4 envelopes. Each envelope
can be used for anything you want, with the restriction
that the final amplitude is controlled by envelope 4 (if
the final amplitude is controlled). So any envelope can
be used to control any modulatable parameter (postively
and negatively). Extensive modulating capabilities.
Memory : 40 writable pacth locations, a cartridge with another 80
is an option.
Interface : Absolutely great. A big 80 character display with 10
buttons around it. If an option must be selected the
name of the option is printed below or above the
corresponding button. For data entry there is a data
slider and up/down buttons. For patch selection the
patch names are printed in the display and you can walk
through the memory banks looking for the one you want.
For selection push the button below or above the name.
Midi : Excellent implementation. Poly timbrality, a timbre
can be assigned a channel. The ESQ then dynamically
assigns its voices to the channels.
Specials : A full blown 8 track 2500 note (expandable to 10000
notes) sequencer on board. Sequences and patches can be
stored on a Mirage disk drive.
Personal : Well, I bought this one and I haven't stopped smiling
since the moment I brought it home. The capabilities are
immense and although the factory patches don't sound
that impressive I feel that once a real synth guru gets
to program this machine the results will be
unprecedented. Still, there are some patches that
sound *very* nice to me. I like the touch of the
keyboard very much. Also the manual proved to be very
clear.
Drive and synthesize carefully,
Eduard Tulp tulp@cs.vu.nl
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please note : Any opinions expressed here are strictly my own and subject
to change without prior notice.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
## Yamaha TX81Z
>M'boy, hie yourself on down to the local music vendorama and cast your
>eyes upon the TX81Z, one of the newfangled boxes from the good ol' boys
>at Yamaha. It's comparable to the FB01 and TX7 in many ways; the biggest
>win, tho', is that it can be programmed through the front panel.
>It fits in a single rack mount space, lists for about $495, and is reviewed
>in the current issue of Keyboard. I was all set to whip out my checkbook
>and take home an FB01 when I saw and heard this; I've decided to wait
>a little while and accumulate the difference in cost (FB01 =~ $350) and
>pick up one of these critters instead.
>
Before you go out and buy an TX-81Z, you should be aware that the machine is
buggy. Go down to your Yamaha dealer and set up the TX-81Z to play on
performance #16 (Amazon Flute). Then start playing something, and make sure
you use a few Bs in your piece. After a short time you'll find that the
entire pitch class of B is mistuned by at least an octave. I just
replicated the bug as I'm typing this article and right now if I hit a B
below middle C it comes out as an G above middle C! Only certain pitch
classes are effected - so far this bug has occured for me on pitch classes
B, Bb, and A. [Note: do not try to show this bug by pounding on a B several
hundred times -- it won't show up that way. Just start playing!]
Christopher Chow (a fustrated TX-81Z owner)
## Yamaha FB-01
Speaking of Yammaha, I've been using the FB-01 synthesizer via a
midi interface on my Amiga at home. The FB-01 has very nice sound
quality. It supports up to 8 different voices, depending on how
many instruments are selected, and the octave ranges allocated.
The price is pretty reasonalbe: About $280 + $49-59 for a midi
adapter for the Amiga's serial port. The FB-01 does not have
internal amplification, but it can be patched into your stereo just
as you would your Amiga. The FB-01 is also small, about the size
of a textbook.
Bill Mayhew
## Yamaha DX7IIFD
I just bought a DX7IIFD and thought I would share my experience.
Contrary to the old american DX7, the new model does not come
with foot controller or sustain pedals. (boo!) However, my
salesman was happy to give me a cheapy sustain pedal for free.
The user manual sucks. Basically, it's a list of the various LCD
readouts plus a little side commentary here and there about
various differences between the DX7 and the DX7II. In fact, it
says that if you want to learn how to program it, buy the old
manual!!! I don't have one of those, but fortunately I had
gotten a copy of "The Complete DX7" by Howard Massey. Highly
recommended, but you constantly have to figure out what
corresponds to the newer DX.
There are 64 internal factory voice patches loaded in and 32
performance memories (basically various combinations of the 64
voices in dual and split modes). Some are good (the pianos,
clavinet, vibes), some are great (Warm Strings, an analog-like
synth ensemble (#24), harpsichord), but most are pretty useless.
A ROM cartridge contains another 2 banks of performance/voice
memory. The first bank is a copy of the internal. The second
bank has some other patches. (In the Laboratory was a
particularly memorable SPFX sound and the rubber piano is very
nice!). The old DX7 patches were not included (boo!). I'll have
to get them from someone.
Some of the patches are modulated in stereo and sound very good.
One point to note is that all notes sounding at a particular time
will always be in the same pan area -- you can't ring one note
softly and have it go to A and then play another loud and have it
go to B -- they will both shift to B. There are some ways to
equalize things though.
As far as sound goes (is that important? :-)) it is pretty
awesome, however, I do hear some noise through the headphones
when notes in the middle of the keyboard are depressed and I seem
to be getting some high pitched buzzing out of the A/B channels
in the back too. I haven't really had the chance to set it up
with an amp properly so I can't tell what the problem is.
Whether it's a problem in just mine or a general noise problem is
anybody's guess at this point (comments welcome!).
The diskette drive is something of a disappointment. You CANNOT
save individual voices to the drive. All you can do is save the
entire internal or RAM4 at once. However, you can have many
files on the disk so you can save quite a bit of patches. I
haven't tried the MIDI recorder feature but it limits incoming
data to 20K and seems of limited value. You certainly can't
using it as a non-quantizing sequencer anyway.
I haven't had much chance to play with micro tuning but it is
there and works (they use Werckmeister for the Harpsichord).
Fractional scaling can only be saved to a RAM cart (or the disk,
but only after it's been stored in the RAM cart and it must
reside in the cart while you use it). I don't have one so I
can't really try it. Also, there is no way to store both voice
and fractional scaling on the same cart -- FS hogs the whole
cart.
The sliders are much improved and are assignable to just about
any parameter possible. Really nicely done.
The MIDI implementation seems adequate although nothing great.
You can have it send out program changes each time you switch to
a new performance, and you can even map them so the program
change number is different from the performance number (yeah!!).
There is also an immediate program change feature in which you
hold the performance key down and type the three digits -- nice,
but I wouldn't want to have to do that during a song.
Controllers are assignable. I've yet to find out how well it
will talk to an old DX.
At any rate -- overall -- very positive. I know I've griped a
lot, but I'm used to a cleaner user interface and attention to
detail from the computer market. It's just beginning to show up
in the synth biz. Most of these things are kind of minor.
What's next?? Oh, maybe a TX81Z, Simmons MIDI audio mixer, and a
digital delay.
Great!! Take two!!
--
Robert N. Berlinger
## Yamaha DX7IID
In article <1012@aecom.UUCP>, naftoli@aecom.UUCP (Robert N. Berlinger) writes:
> As far as sound goes (is that important? :-)) it is pretty
> awesome, however, I do hear some noise through the headphones
> when notes in the middle of the keyboard are depressed...
A noteworthy example is the otherwise excellent vibes patch -- factory
internal number 18. If the ambient noise is low enough (*not* the
typical music store!) you'll hear a distinct buzz that becomes obvious
as the note decays. It seems equally bothersome for all notes.
> The diskette drive is something of a disappointment. You CANNOT
> save individual voices to the drive. ....
> Fractional scaling can only be saved to a RAM cart (or the disk,
> but only after it's been stored in the RAM cart and it must
> reside in the cart while you use it).
This brings to mind an early article on the new DX7s (was it in
Keyboard magazine?) where the reviewer said he couldn't imagine that
*anybody* would buy a DX7IID when the floopy model (DX7IIFD) is only
a few hundred bucks more. I did, and RNB's observation that Yamaha's
implementation of disk functions is arbitrarily incomplete is only
one reason why.
Reason two: selecting load/save/erase/... functions from the DX's
buttons is no fun. Anyone who shares my disdain for menu-based
operating systems will agree -- less intimidating for the novice,
*maybe*, but annoying and cumbersome for the expert user.
Specifying file names on the DX, like entering patch names, is less
fun yet. Imagine typing from an alphabet of some 64+ characters arranged
in two rows, each some 31 inches long, of "keys". File management,
it seems to me, is something best handled by a general-purpose
computer running the user's favorite OS and applications software,
with a QWERTY keyboard or some other pleasant data entry mechanism.
Reason three is summarized by a Geoff Goodfellow quip: "Floppies
are the IBM punch cards of the '80s." Grungy technology tolerated
out of necessity. I don't want a device in *my* synth that needs
to have a head protector inserted during transport, that needs
periodic cleaning to avoid destroying data, is slow and goes "bzzz--
bzzz-bzzzz". Keep the floopies out of the sun, away from magnetic
fields, do not fold, spindle, or mutilate..... This is the kind of
bother that technology should be alleviating, and can with EEPROM,
bubble memory and the like. *sigh*.
> The sliders are much improved and are assignable to just about
> any parameter possible. Really nicely done.
Poorly done, I think. An ill-considered hack. From a note I posted
some weeks ago:
] There are some new parameters that are associated with "performance
] memories", not patch memories. For example, the two sliders (CS1, CS2)
] can be linked to nearly any of the voice edit parameters. The footswitch
] inputs (FS1, FS2) can be independently applied to the A-voices or B-voices,
] and FS2 can be assigned to do any of several things, notably including
] "key hold" (sostenuto). But these features come alive only in performance
] mode (where you call up a performance memory) -- not when you call up a
] single voice like on the DX7.
]
] Some of the performance features, like pan mode (for stereo output) clearly
] make sense only in performance mode where you're using two patches. But
] I incline to believe that others of them (the list above is not complete)
] would be useful in single patch playing, and would better have been placed
] in the regular patch memories (though one might want a performance mode
] feature to override certain patch memory parameters).
Worse, the control you get may be too hard to use effectively in
performance. Once assigned to a parameter, a slider behaves just
like the Data Entry slider in edit mode. Suppose you'd like to change
the operator output level, which runs from 0 to 99, of a modulator.
The musically useful range of this level may be, say, from 60 to 70.
Thus out of the 3 centimeters of slider travel, you'll have just
3 millimeters in which to manipulate the full desired range of expression.
Yamaha should take a clue from Lexicon's PCM70, which can flexibly
link nearly any midi event or controller to nearly any parameter
*through a linear function* in something akin to slope-intercept form.
-- Bob Jesse / rnj@brl.arpa / 301 889-7353
## Casio CZ-1
Although I don't personally own a CZ-1, I have played around with them and I
feel that they are a good machine. For a first attempt at producing a 'pro'
keyboard, I feel that Casio did a splendid job with the CZ-1. The good points
of the CZ-1 are that it is 8 voice, velocity sensitive, pressure (after-touch)
sensitive, has stereo outputs (gangable to mono), and supports multitimbral
(8 voices assignable to 8 independent MIDI channels). It's one drawback,
I feel is its use of the phase distortion synthesis method used by Casio
for most of their synthesizers. I do feel, however, that this last point is
a matter of personal taste, and only really comes into play when a large
systwem implementation using multiple synths is being considered (i.e., there
are less expensive ways to combine analog and digital synth modules to get
voices better than the CZ-1, alone, could produce). For a single synthesizer
that is going to be used, at first, for learning, I feel that the voices of
the CZ-1 are very good to excellent. The keyboard is totally unweighted, but
this shouldn't bother synthesists who are not stuck on that 'real piano kbd'
feel, however. The kbd, on the CZ-1 does stand up favorably to most synth
kbds I have played (The exceptions being the Kawai K-3 and the Ensoniq ESQ).
About the voices on te CZ-1 ... Since the PD synthesis technique is really
more of a hybrid of digital and analog synthesis techniques it is capable
of producing 'fatter' sounds than a totally digital device (1 DX-7 say),
however, since the PD technique if looked at in digital terms uses only 1
algorithm (as opposed to the 32 available in a DX-7) it is less flexible in
programming than a truely digital device. When viewed as an analog synth,
it is more varried in that the PD system can be loked at as a 2 OSC, 2 Filter,
2 Amp system that also allows Ring Modulation (this is no trivial matter,
since I can't name any non-Casio synth that actually has capability for
ring modulation at a price of less than 2500) and noise modulation. In all
what this means is that the Casio is a good compromise between an analog
synth and a digital synth, and for the price is an extermely good deal.
Multiple channel operation .....
The CZ-1 allows multiple channel operation assignable to independent MIDI
channels.
Kbds for under $1000
The CZ-1 is probably the most full featured kbd for under $1000. Look at
the Oberheim Matrix-6, the Kawai K-3 and the Ensoniq ESQ (priced a little
higher) also.
Velocity sensitivity .....
It is usefull but for a horn player, you will probably appreciate the
modulation possibilities using after touch pressure sensitivity more. But,
I don't think you can even buy a synth without velocity sensitivity any more.
John ROSSI@NUSC.ARPA
## Roland D-50
Roland has a new synth out. The one I saw (at Guitar Center in Oakland)
has been in the store for less than a week. Units for sale to normal
mortals (the salesman said Stevie Wonder is the only one to have his
own yet) will be available in about 3 weeks. There isn't any printed
material to give out yet either.
It's the D-50 "linear synthesizer". It has both a digital version of the
usual subtractive ('analog') stuff (wave generators, filters, etc) and
PCM (pulse code modulation, or whatever). Sounds are made with 2 generators,
each of which can be either type. The sources are combined somehow.
There is ring modulation and chorus. Also reverb, I think.
It has pitch scaling for different tunings, though not as fine as the
new Yamahas. 12 keys can be scaled to n/8 of an octave,
for 1 <= n <= more-than-8. Also a couple of different values of scaling,
which I think were a tad more than 1 (octave per 12 keys).
Pitch can be velocity-sensitive also, +/- up to 2 octaves.
I think the frequency and amplitude (were there other ones too?) envelopes
have 5 or 6 points in them, though I don't know if each point is totally
flexible.
It has midi in, out, and thru, with patch dump and load via midi or
to/from a memory card.
It has local mode, split keyboard, with midi-in and keyboard assignable
to splits and voices in a whole bunch of different ways.
The sound is 16 bits, with 8 voices.
It makes some very rich sounds. Of course, since my only real synth
experience is a DX-7 with no chorus, reverb, or anything else at all,
I don't know how much of the richness is from the method of generation
and how much is from the effects.
I skimmed through the manual -- it has lots of info, but it could be
written better. The knowledge didn't jump right into my head.
It is fully programmable, and has 64 internal patches.
Changing parameters looks even harder than on a DX-7, though, since
there isn't a big bank of multi-purpose buttons which can be
assigned to parameters. There ARE some buttons on it, though.
The display is bigger than that of a DX-7. It has aftertouch, though
I don't think it was the individual aftertouch for each key variety.
All in all, it looks like a pretty damn good reason to go
visit your friendly neighborhood keyboard store.
Oh, yes -- list price 1895.
Brian Peterson, ...!ucbvax!ucbernie!brianp (brianp@ernie.berkeley.edu)
## Roland D-50
I have been told it is 100% digital all the way up to the D/A at the output!
I like the sound very much, even though I've only heard it a tiny bit. But
then again, I'm so tired of hearing DX-7 clunkity-clunk sounds that anything
new is going to be appealing. Seriously, I think the Roland D-50 may be a
very good new direction to be going in.
--
Mark Steven Jeghers
## Korg DS-8
Last night I finally broke down and bought my first Polyphonic
Synth. What pissed me off about other Digital Synths like the
DX-7 was the stupid FM.
The Korg DS-8 has FM capability (Although limited compared to the DX-7)
as well as control over typical analog modules (essentially emulating
an analog Synth)
Features:
(1) Full Midi Implementation (makes a great Midi Controller!)
(2) Velocity-sensing keyboard with aftertouch! Joystick
(3) 8 Voice 2 Oscillators/voice
(4) Seperate ADSR Envelopes for VCO, VCA, VCF (lowpass only, ...sigh!)
ON EACH OSCILLATOR!
(5) Ring Modulator
(6) Chorus
(7) Flanger
(8) Digital Delay/Reverb
(9) Split Keyboard Capability
(10) Layering Capability (i.e. Strings and Harpsichord Simultaniously etc.)
(11) Each of the eight voices can be assigned a different
program (patch)!! Great for Sequencer Software!
(12) RAM/ROM Voice Storage Cartridges
(13) 100 voice storage onboard
Price: I paid $995.00, (could have done better mailorder)
^^^^^^^
This Synth seems destined to become the Working Man's Synth.
you can actually PROGRAM this synth!! No Carrier/Modulator ratios
and bessel functions on this baby, but you can use two oscillators
in an FM pair to get those great FM metallic sounds. Presets are nice
too! You can take the edge off the harsh sounds with a EQ-Like Brighness
Control (Gets rid of the harshness in digital sounds) VERY WARM & CLEAN!
Problems:
Only Lowpass filtering (Sigh!)
Keyboard Split feature seems to have a bug (I tried to use
a Helicopter & Trumpet sound sumultaniously and
the trumpet sounded like an electric razor!
Documentation Sucks (as usual)
I originally was looking for a simple MIDI controller with a few
preset piano sounds so that I could practice playing and expand
with rack mount TX-816s. This synth could eat into the $2000
DX-7 Market if Yamaha is not careful. I understand that Yamaha
and Korg developed the DS-8 together!
In short, the DS-8 is worth looking at if you want a Midi
Controller or a first time synth. I wish they would come
op with a rack-mount version of this baby.
If anyone else has bought one of these or wants to
ask me a few questions, reply by e-mail.
-ed-
## Yamaha FB-01
I've had an FB-01 for about a month, so here are my impressions...
* it's a little noisy; the new TX-81 uses 12 bits instead of the FB's
10, to reduce the noise. You may never notice it unless recording,
and only in quiet passages.
* the hammond organ patches are great!
* the clav sounds are quite good also.
* don't look here for good string sounds (apparently all Yamaha DX-type
boxes have this deficiency).
* It's an outstanding value (I paid $276 for one).
* You will need Amiga software to modify/create patch parameters; they
can't be accessed from the front panel.
Summary: I would recommend it, especially if you have another synth to
round out the sounds. If I had an analog synth, I would combine a
percussive sound (eg. clav) on the FB w/ a strings patch on the analog.
It's a sound that is difficult to get on either one alone...
dB hplabs!hpccc!blevins
## Yamaha CLP-300
Well, I have had the CLP-300 for two whole days now, so it's time for a
full report. Last night, Carl Gutekunst and I got together to midi-
together the 300 and his Korg DW8000.
The only thing that really bothers me about the 300 is the noise (hiss).
Upon closer examination, the hiss is audible from the internal speaker
system as well as the headphones. I am afraid the noise is just inherent
in the sampling or D/A or something. When no notes are sounding, there
is no noise at all, and there was no noise when the DW8000 was played
through the 300's speakers (except what is natural to the korg).
The good things about the 300:
excellent keyboard feel. Except for the hiss, I really feel like I
get the expressiveness of a good, real piano keyboard. To me, this is
worth the price of the unit.
16 note polyphony.
Detaches from stand for portability. But it is heavy (any weighted
keyboard is heavy).
Very good sounds, except for the hiss (dammit).
stereo line ins/outs, midi in/out, two pedal ins, headphone jack.
Volume control, "stereo symphonic" (marginal chorus, seems real fake to
me), two pianos (normal, bright (bright much better to me)), elec. piano,
harpsichord, vibes. midi/transpose switch for controlling functions.
Good midi: Selectable channel for receive and send, sends both pedals,
sends program changes (0-4). the spec says it sends all 128 levels of
velocity, but it might be that this keyboard has the same problem as some
other Yamaha units: it only sends from 0 to 113 or so (this is only
conjecture since we couldn't actually see what velocity byte was being
sent; but, the resopnses to actually playing the korg keyboard and the 300
keyboard seemed identical). Another possibility is that it requires
a mallet to deliver maximum velocity. Also, you can, by pressing two buttons
simultaneously, turn the unit into two separate midi units: key presses
only generate midi out, no local sound. Just what is needed for using
the 300 as a midi master.
So, it midi'd to the DW8000 with no problem. We got some interesting
sounds by layering the two! Even if I only ever really use it as a midi
keyboard, I am happy (can you say "I want a K250 rack mount"?).
bcase
## Korg DW-8000
In article <10109@decwrl.DEC.COM> joe@hanauma.UUCP (Joe Dellinger) writes:
<1) I have had a Korg DW-8000 synthesizer as a stand-alone for a year
## Yamaha CLP-300
For those who missed out on the product announcements, Yamaha is now shipping
their newest Clavinova Electronic Digitial Pianos: the 76-key CLP-200, and the
88-key CLP-300. Both use Yamaha's "Advanced Digital Waveform System," which is
a part-sampled part-synthed technique. The sound generation electronics is
supposedly identical to that of the CLP-50, although both Brian and I thought
the 300 sounded slightly better on _fortisimo_.
The CLP-300 has five voices, as Brian explained; the CLP-200 is lacking the
vibes and electric piano, and has the CLP-50's "warm" piano instead of the
"bright" piano. (I think that was a mistake.) Both come with a stand with two
pedals, a bench, and a pair of built-in speakers. The right pedal is a damper
(or sustain); the left pedal can be selected either for soft or sustenuto.
List price for the CLP-300 was $2250 (I paid $1850, at a store where I'm a
regular customer), but that was supposed to go up June 1st and Yamaha hasn't
yet announced the new price.
The keyboard is heavily weighted and has a "snap" action, like a real piano.
The fulcrum is in the right place so you don't have to strain while pushing
the black keys. If you like playing a grand, you love it.
And some quick thoughts from the other half of the ensemble:
In article <937@apple.UUCP> bcase@apple.UUCP (Brian Case) writes:
>The only thing that really bothers me about the 300 is the noise (hiss).
Possibly I have tin ears :-), but the hiss didn't trouble me at all. The
feeling I had was of listening to a very high quality analog tape of a grand
recorded in a medium size room. That is, lacking any other cues, my ears said
I was hearing a very good piano in a slightly noisy room with a slightly noisy
tape deck. *MUCH* less noisy than earlier Clavinovas or most FM synths. About
the same as the CLP-50.
The dealer did try adding an external noise gate to his own CLP. No dice: the
sound of the gate switching in and out was more objectionable than the hiss.
>Volume control, "stereo symphonic" (marginal chorus, seems real fake to
>me), two pianos (normal, bright (bright much better to me)), elec. piano,
>harpsichord, vibes.
I thought the electric piano was so-so. The Vibes and harpsichord were supurb.
And the pianos were incomparable. Secondary resonances, sympathic vibrations,
the works. The chorus was awful in a room, although I found it pleasant in my
open-air headphones. It did not add to the noise level.
Comparing the CLP-300 to the Roland RD-3000 is no contest; as nice as the RD
is, the CLP blows it away. The RD-3000's keyboard has the fulcrum set way too
close to the front, there is no snap-action, and it feels somewhat mushy. And
while the RD has superb response and excellent sounds, it doesn't sound like a
piano: it has a buzzing quality that sounds more like a guitar. The RD-3000
has no MIDI features; you have to get the RD-300 for that, but then you have
no speakers. The RD-300 is more flexible than the CLP-300 as a MIDI master,
although for my money I'd rather have the CLP with a cheap external MIDI
controller.
Yeah, you got that right. After two hours with Brian's CLP-300 last night, I
ran out and bought my own today. How embarrassing; I've never done anything
like that before.... :-)
## Roland D-50
It's here... Heaven, Nirvana, the Elysian Fields [probable sp] and Dante's
Earthly Paradise, all rolled into one gorgeous unit-- yes, I most indeed
am speaking of the Roland D-50 linear synthesizer. This baby's hot-- so
hot it burned a quick hole in my bank account. I've got my deposit down
(the waiting list is 2 months long), and look forward to being able to play
an instrument with sound quality unparalled in any other stand-alone
synth, without any processing equipment, in the price range of $3000 or less.
Actually, it sounds better than some synths costing even more. But hey,
all this is unsubstantiated rhetoric; allow me to mention some of the
specs, those that I can remember.
A) 61 keys, velocity sensitive, with aftertouch
B) 64 on-board patch banks (actually, it's 128, as each patch
is, in reality, composed of two sounds, called "partials.")
C) Linear Algorithm Synthesis
D) Somewhere around 110 PCM samples to add to your sounds.
And best of all:
E) Built in digital delay, reverb, chorus and parametric EQ, which
if purchased seperatly, would surely cost upwards of $1000, as
a rough minimum estimate.
The keyboard feels really good, far superior to a Korg or Ensonique. In
my opinion, it even feels a bit better than the DX-7 family keyboards.
Roland insists, however, upon using a bastardly joystick for paramater
changing, rather than a data slider. They should have stuck with a data
wheel, like on their other keyboards. However, that's a small price to
pay for such an incredible package.
And the sounds? Utterly incredible. Truly amazing. Mind-boggling
in their brightness. The built-in digital processing equipment does
wonders. The sounds range from the standards-- "electric piano," "rich
brass" (rich is the word)-- to gorgeous string sounds ("arco strings", "digital
cello", " jete strings"), to fantasy sounds guaranteed to bring out the
hidden Vangelis withing us all ("Fantasia," "Stacatto Heaven," "DigitalNative
Dance," (this has to be heard to be believed)).
I was going to purchase an ESQ-1, but on the day I was in the store
ready to lay down my money, what should be sitting below the ESQ but the
new Roland D-50. After comparing the two, I came to the conclusion that-- well,
that there is no comparison. The Roland's sounds are like a multi-hued
fantasy world, while the ESQ was more like a dry novel. Certainly, I'll
miss the on-board sequencer, and a true multi-timbral set-up (the Roland
is bi-timbral), but these losses are more than compensated for by the incredible
sound of the unit.
Of course, this is all subjective; I advise, therefore, that each and
everyone of you-- if you haven't done so already-- pay a visit to your local
music store, and check into the Roland D-50-- I think you'll be pleasantly
amazed.
Oh, the price (as suggested by Roland) is $1895. However, with Roland's
price increases soon to be upon us, this figure will most certainly rise.
Marc Visnick
## Yamaha TX-81Z
The Yamaha TX-81Z does improper note stealing with the sustain pedal down.
Unlike the other models that I have checked (DX-7, TX-216/TF1, FB-01),
the TX-81Z steals notes in (FIFO) order including notes that are held down
on the keyboard (no Note OFF sent yet). Notes held down on the keyboard
should have priority over other notes. This is essential for polyphonic
instruments (e.g. piano's).
Here's a simple test.
Without the sustain/loud pedal:
1) Strike and hold a low note with your left hand.
2) Now play many quick notes with your right hand.
Notice that the low note continues to sound for as long as you hold
it down (it is not stolen).
With the sustain pedal:
Repeat (1) and (2) above.
Notice that the TX-81Z steals the low (held) note after 8
notes/operators are consumed by the sustain (8 notes for single
op patches, 4 notes for dual op patches). The other synths (e.g.
FB-01) behave properly, held notes are sustained in priority over
non-held notes.
Given the myriad parameters for the TX-81Z, has anyone found a way to change
this improper behavior (I've checked the index and have done a quick scan of
the manual)? If this is a real bug in the TX-81Z, then I consider it a major
flaw and would request a fix from Yamaha ASAP.
-Gary
## Korg DSS-1
## Roland S-50
In article <1087@hropus.UUCP> bks@hropus.UUCP (Spike) writes:
>I'm interested in purchasing either one of the two following samplers:
> KORG DSS-1 or Roland S-50
Both of these are good synthesizers. The DSS-1 has a 48K maximum sampling
rate. I have used it and find that it's ability to synthesize and put effects
on samples makes for some very interesting sounds. It can be purchased for
about $1600 in L.A. Maybe it can be found even cheaper, but that's the
cheapest I've seen it. Needless to say, you should listen to both before you
buy, but there is something to consider. When you listen to a piano sample, or
any sample of something you "know" what it's supposed to sound like, be
careful. Quality of a sample is a function of the person who took the sample
as well as the machine. If you plan to depend on available samples alone,
it may be more important, but if you're doing your own, bring a microphone
to the store and try a little sampling on the spot. The DSS-1 has 1/2 meg
normally, but it can be expanded (I'm pretty sure...) The S-50 has 1/2 meg
too normally, and I don't have any idea if it can be expanded or its sampling
rate.
Ron Goodman
## Roland D-50
This D-50 is a DX-7 killer! You better check out this one - here in Sweden
there are so many that wants this baby so we have to wait for this excellent
synth for ages...
Roland had a *very great* idea when they use the attacks from ordinary sampled
sounds and the rest is pure synthesized! This means that the sound is both
familiar and warm - and also exciting and bright.
Also those who dislike the thin sounds from DX-7:s have at last an alternative
that makes very big fat sounds, even if they sound digital and FM-like.
However when we checked this beta-release synt in the shop we noticed that
if we used for instance very many sound (16 voices) the synth suddenly
got quiet - maybe this beta release had some bugs in the firmware so
it couldn't handle the maximum usage of voices?
Anyhow this is the synth of the year!!!
Kent $andvik
## Roland D-50
This is my first thoughts about the Roland D-50 syntheziser I got in
my hands 24 hours ago. The overall view is that it has so beautiful
sounds that even my wife that usually complains about too loud music
in our house admitted that this machine really sounded wonderful.
The D-50 is like a poor man's Fairlight!
FUNCTIONALITY:
I usually test a new synth by not reading the manuals during the first
three days and I try to do nearly all the things you have to do, play
with the presets, editing and copying new sounds to memory.
I stupid me handles these things with pure logic (Spock would like
this) the synthesiser has a very good man-machine interface, otherwise
it is contructed for synth-hackers.
Now D-50 comes in middle between - you can't straight away figure
out how different functions are handled, but if you try around for
a while it all clears out.
+++ (good, good, good)
- A good LCD-screen with menu handling functions
- Not so many buttons to press, but not so few either
- The manual is readable
- The machine weights nearly nothing
- Very easy to play with the aftertouch on
--- (yakky, yakky, yakky)
- Too much usage of plastic, the pitch/modulation wheel
feels too clumpsy and instead of the maybe wonderful
Roland invention of an alpha wheel there is a joystick
for editing patches.
This joystick is also too plastic and if you try to change
some parameters with the x-line you easily push the little
stick in y-line and change another parameter setting.
OK - there are also two buttons for fine tuning (decrease/
increase) but this ugly stick convinced me to buy the
additional programming unit in near future.
-The keyboard is not so nice - more plastic
THE SOUNDS:
Wonderful, wonderful, rich orchestral sounds added with clear FM-like
sounds. There is some difficulties to program the sounds - the same
problem as with FM synthesis, you don't really have a decent picture
in your head what happens if you turn the knobs. Note that maybe
if one plays with this baby for a couple of months the situation
clears up.
I am going to use D-50 for electronic experiment music (style Eno),
and rock music with Wagner impressions. This machine is so handy
you could use it for every kind of music, strings are great (actually
based on sampled ones), brass sounds are programmed like the known
Toto-ones, and the FM-electric piano is OK. I compared the sounds
with my old Jupiter-6, and D-50 is 1E06 times more clearly sounding
than the old analog workhorse.
As I stated before, the nearest synth I'm thinking about when I play
the D-50 is the Fairlight...
BUGS & PROBLEMS:
OK - time for the ugly notices.
Item 1:
Warning - there is a bug of some kind with the new memory cards and
the D-50. Roland sells nowadays new memory cards, they look like
creditcards, and are actually 32k byte RAMS with a battery backup
inside.
I bought one (beacuse you can save 2 * 64 presets) to the D-50, and
when I pushed in the card and tried to load in some new sound to the
memory the D-50 complained about "Illegal Card". You'll get a
ROM card with the machine with all the presets inside, and this
card worked with my synth. However when I complained about this
in the shop they didn't have any answer since I was the first that
bought *this memory-card* in Sweden.
Either there are some construction problems with the cards that
arrived first, or the interface in the D-50 doesn't recognize the
other card (software bum, I maybe have to switch new PROMS inside).
If you buy one of these cards - check it out in the shop first!
Item 2:
Unfortunately there is some audible noice coming from the inside
reverb unit - this happens with synthesized sounds that have a
very weak signal and have a lot of reberb on.
OK - these were my first impressions of the machine - still it's
worth every $2050 I payed for it. There are a lot of other goodies
still to try out, the MIDI connections, how to make the partials
to modulate each other and lots of more fun to do in nighttime.
If there are others interested to form a maillist about
the D-50 and how to utilize it I would be glad if you
took contact with me! Rock on!
Kent Sandvik
## Ensoniq ESQ-1
## Roland D-50
I am looking at synths and am trying to decide between the
new Roland D-50 and the Ensoniq ESQ-1. The ESQ is about
1/3 cheaper than the D-50. The D-50 has absolutely MONSTER
factory patches. Are equivalently good patches POSSIBLE on
the ESQ-1?? The synthesis model of the two machines appears
quite similar, with the ESQ only have 3 oscillators per voice
while the D-50 essentially has 4. The ESQ, on the other hand,
appears to have a much richer modulation structure, more
envelope generators, and a controllable output pan. The user
interface for the ESQ is much more accessible I think (biases
of an old analog hack), and the ESQ is 8-voice polytimbral
while the D-50 is 8-voice polyphonic with bi-timbral operation available
by sacrificing two oscillators per voice and using a keyboard split.
The ESQ doesn't seem to have the on-board digital delay and
related processing.
One question about the ESQ sequencer - can I use the internal
sequencer and MIDI input also?? Can I get sync out of the internal
sequencer so this is a reasonable question??
So, the D-50 sounds better out of the box. The ESQ seems to
be more synthesizer.
Can anyone offer any comments??
-Mike O'Dell
## Ensoniq ESQ-1
## Roland D-50
> The D-50 has absolutely MONSTER
factory patches. Are equivalently good patches POSSIBLE on
the ESQ-1??
No. One big reason is that the D-50 has a bunch of sampled sounds for
the attacks of notes. Another is that the D-50 has 16 voices rather
that 8, so many sound are layered. Even in just layering my ESQ and my
TX-81z, I noticed that the sound improves significantly.
> The user interface for the ESQ is much more accessible I think
Personally, I feel the ESQ has the best interface of any in the under
$3000 class
> The ESQ doesn't seem to have the on-board digital delay and
related processing.
This is quite significant. You'll pay an extra $700 to add the
processing to the ESQ.
> Can anyone offer any comments??
I feel the D-50 is a class above the ESQ, mainly because of it's sound.
However, the sequencer and multi-mode make it up for serious
consideration. If you plan on playing live (i.e. the sequencer or lack
of multi-mode is not a bit deal) or if you record professionally,
definately spend the extra for the D-50. But if you want to sequence,
do home studio stuff, you may want to consider the ESQ.
You might compare the D-50 to a Corvette and the ESQ-1 to a more general
family car...
marc webster
## Ensoniq ESQ-1
Here are some interesting features of the ESQ-1:
*) 8 different (!!) sounds can be played at once, when careful programmed
(split-keyboard) 16 sounds can be played (although only 8 key's at
once). Very interesting if you are doing (home-)recording.
*) The sequencer can in principle synchronise with other sequencers. The
question of who is slave and who is master can sometimes be a problem.
For instance, using the MSQ 700 (Roland) as a slave to the ESQ-1 will
not in all cases be successful. The problem however resites in the MSQ,
it is not meant to be a slave (according to the manual).
*) It seems that the sounds of the ESQ-1 are not admired by every one, I
personally love them. I hate those thin sounds of the DX-7, never
understood the big fuss it created. And now Yamaha comes back with a
new version of this oldy. Still more expensive and everybody seems to
love it. It beats me (it's not my purpose to start world-war three
here). In my opinion, the sounds provided by ensoniq factory are only
half of the time usable, but when edited somewhat according to your own
preferences, they are great !! Take for instance the sampled
bass-guitar, if used well, no one can tell the difference (oke, almost
no one).
*) Finally, the choice should depend meanly on its final use. If you are
planning to use it in a band, maybe you are better of with the new
Roland, i.e. if you like those sounds better. But if you are much into
recording, like I am, I can assure you that the ESQ-1 is a much better
choice. You can use the sequencer as a kind of 8-track recorder, each
track it's own sound (although 8 keys at once), synchronise it with a
drum machine and start building up your arrangements. The sequencer
facilitates many editing functions, allowing all kinds of manipulations.
It is also possible to assign other synthesisers to each track
separately. So that in the end (if you have other synthesisers or can
borrow them) you can still use lots of different sounds.
*) It is really a great synth, the ESQ-1,
Greetings Bert.
*) By the way the ESQ-1 is much cheaper as well...
## Ensoniq ESQ-1
## Roland D-50
>Subject: ESQ-1 vs D-50
>
>I am looking at synths and am trying to decide between the
>new Roland D-50 and the Ensoniq ESQ-1. The ESQ is about
>1/3 cheaper than the D-50.
> ...
>Can anyone offer any comments??
>
> -Mike O'Dell
I decided on the D-50 for particular reasons. First, I haven't played
in years. I played a Hammond A-101 in my pre-college years and haven't
touched a keyboard since. So as my first instrument I wanted a quality
instrument that wouldn't limit me in sound generation but would limit me
a little in MIDI'ization. By that I mean, I wanted something that would
assist me in disciplining myself to do those much loved finger excercises
before I have the urges of goin' MIDI (Sequencer, Drum Machine, Sampler...).
Secondly, as I looked over the ESQ-1 and the D-50 I felt, without meaning
disrespect to ESQ-1 owners and at the risk of showing some careless thought,
that the ESQ-1 was like those Yorx or Emerson all in one stereo systems.
You know, the ones that have the receiver, cassette tape, mini-EQ, speakers
and sometime LP all in one. If any one component broke the whole thing was
broke. The ESQ-1 is a nice unit, but not the one for me
I will be adding to this net group a list of some items from the NAMM show.
I talked to the fellows at Profound Sound and they mentioned some Roland
products. I mention this here because Roland announced the D-550 which is
the D-50 rack-mount version may be one of your choices if you have some
semblence of a system already. The list price is $1695.00.
Dan Arvidson
## Roland D-50
I have recently had the extreme pleasure of playing with the Roland D50
"Linear" Synthesizer. Anyone who is on the market for a synth would do well
to hear this machine before you buy. It lists for $1895 and can be gotten
(maybe) for $1695 at your better dealers. I was not given the opportunity
to try and edit some of the patches and would ask anyone on the net who
has purchased one to post a description of the relative ease (or difficulty)
of creating sounds on this unit. I have heard that it is quite straight-
forward and inspirational rather than intimidating as can be some of the
better FM synths available. I understand that the approach to programming
this machine is also a "linear" method which sounded pretty exciting.
The unit has been out about 4 months and made quite an impression at the NAMM
show from what I have heard. I am not even especially blown away by most
Roland synths but this model has a freshness that I have not heard in a
synth for under $2K. It has built in effects (digital chorus, Reverb and
compression) and has 100 PCM sampled wave tables on board to be mixed either
with other PCM samples or from other synthesized wave forms (Roland refers
to them as "Partials" (who knows why?!)). It is not a sampling machine
however. That is clear. Hear it before buying the new DX-7.
George Demarest
## Roland D-50
The D50 is a digital machine with a new custom-built signal processor
dedicated to all the sound generation and processing. This chip emulates,
*in software*, analog synthesiser sections, sample playback components,
chorus, EQ and reverb. A partial is either a PCM sample (variable pitch,
amplitude envelope, some modulation) or a fully-fledged analog-style
synthesiser (triangle or square wave with PWM, filter with envelope,
amplitude envelope, 3 LFOs and *lots and lots* of options for keyboard
scaling, modulation, etc. etc.). You have 4 partials per patch, maximum -
most of the factory patches have, which is why they're so rich - I tend to
use 2 at a time, for bitimbral work. Each patch is a combination (sum or
ring-modulation) of partials, plus 2 (max) chorus sections (each with several
parameters), 2 (max) EQ sections (each with low gain filter plus a high-gain
parametric), plus the reverb.
I didn't find the D50 that easy to program at first, because there are so
many nuances available - however, you can think about sounds at a much
higher level than the DX7 level - a D50 partial is an entire synth, remember.
I recently approached my D50 with an exact sound in my head (something I'd
heard on a record), and within half an hour had the sound on the keyboard -
THAT, if nothing else, justifies this machine for me!
That's it in a nutshell. I think the D50 blows away the DX7-II, but don't
take my word for it, try one in a shop. I spent 3 hours playing with a display
model, manuals everywhere, before finally going for my chequebook.
By the way, the term `linear' is, as far as I can ascertain, meaningless.
Nick Rothwell
## Roland D-50
If you are looking for a fabulous keyboard, and don't mind paying
several hundred dollars more (it can be purchased, depending upon the
store and your bartering finesse, for around $1750), look at the Roland
D-50. Granted, it does not have the built-in sequencer that the ESQ-1
has, but just look at what it *does* have:
- Velocity-sensitive w/aftertouch (ESQ is only velocity-sensitive)
- Bi-timbral (granted, the ESQ is multi-timbral, a definite plus)
- 100 on-board samples which may be combined by synthesized sounds
- On-board digital delay, reverb, chorus, and EQ, which, if purchased
separatly (which you would have to do for most any other
keyboard, including the ESQ), would surely cost near $1000
or more. Also, all processing is done in the digital
domain, so there is absolutely *no* noise from digital/
analog conversion.
- Sounds which (trite cliche here) will blow your socks off.
Really. These sounds are incredible. I know of no other
synth in the $2000 or less range which delivers sounds
of such impressive magnitude. DigitalNativeDance alone
stands as perhaps the most imaginative factory patch I have ever
heard for *any* synth (Fairlight & Synclavier excluded)
And Stacatto Heaven, or ArcoStrings, or Fantasia-- the
list goes on.
I, too, was contemplating the purchase of an ESQ-1, when out came the D-50.
I weighed the alternatives and came to the definite conclusion that the
superior sound quality (plus aftertouch-- for me, an essential, especially
since Roland was kind enough to tie it into pitch bend), along with the
built-in delay, reverb, chorus and EQ outweighed the loss of the sequencer.
I grant you, for composition the ESQ may have a definite advantage, having
a sequencer built right in. But for overall satisfaction (this, of course,
is *extremely* subjective, so ESQ owners: spare me the flames, please),
I think the D-50 offers far more "bang for the buck."
Marc Visnick
## Ensoniq ESQ-1
i, of course, am a brand new ESQ-1 owner (why the hell else would i be
responding to this posting?). it is, truly, a great synth. and the
price is amazaing, etc., etc. i also considered the D-50 and checked
it out quite extensively. my basic conclusion -- and this relates
particularly to Mr. Visnick's claims of "superior sound quality:"
it is true, the little D-50 does put out some seriously unearthly
sounds. and i would also agree that the D-50 is, in one sense, THE
BARGAIN of the synth industry. particularly if you own a
microcomputer, which makes the ESQ-1's sequencer a little less
desirable (although not completely, because the ESQ-1 sequencer still
is a lot nicer to work with as a quick and dirty tool than most
software packages).
HOWEVER (i know you were all waiting for the BIG however)........ i
personally found the analogish warmth of the ESQ-1 and its own special
brand of digital sounds to be very refreshing -- being originally a
pianist, i really received a sense (maybe i'm deluding myself) of
"feeling" these patches. even the very digitally sounding ones have a
more acoustical feel. in some ways, the ESQ-1 is a bit of a
throwback, soundwise, that is. it doesn't have a real modern (i.e.,
eighties) sound. AND I LIKE THAT!! meanwhile, it IS, in a control
sense, a truly modern instrument -- velocity sensitivity,
multi-timbrality, digital programming and oscillators. and i have to
put in my two cents on the piano patches -- they are rather impressive
in the low and middle registers. originally, i was going to buy a
digital grand and i still am, but the ESQ-1 piano patch allowed me to
postpone that purchase and go on to buy the non-weighted, but
touch-sensitive MIDI controller that i've always needed.
the D-50, on the other hand, seems to be a product of the disease i
call SOUND EVENT INFATUATION, an illness which is so prevalent today.
also called SYNTH PATCH FETISH. more attention is being paid to the
patches (not to mention to how much MIDI knowledge you have and how
much MIDI equipment you have spaghettied together) than whether or not
actually good music is being made. the D-50 is somewhat of a Trevor
Horn Deluxe. that is NOT to say that it isn't a very nice instrument
and that you can't do wonderful things with it. it's just that the
whole marketing of the thing lends itself to music store employees
plugging it in and going PWEONG!!!!. listen to that patch!!!! and
you can delay the shit out of it!!!! -- dudududududududaaaaaaa.
which brings me to my final point of not completely trusting a machine
whose factory patches rely so heavily on digital processing. at
first, it's very impressive, but after a while everything starts
sounding like soup. and what happens if the instrument doesn't sound
that great when you don't ladel on the soup?? i found this to be
somewhat true with the DW-8000 (again, a very nice machine). and here
lies another pitch for the ESQ-1: it sounds great without a lot of
processing. its dry patches are beautiful. and you can make very wet
sounding patches with just the existing programmability.
my deepest apologies to D-50 owners who are offended by my comments.
i just wanted to lay down my own trip, agreeing completely with Mr.
Visnick's statement that this is an extremely subjective area. if i
had the money, i would own both an ESQ-1 and a D-50.
## Ensoniq ESQ-1
I've found a couple things frustrating with the ESQ as my system has
grown. Bascially the Ensoniq wanted to keep the price down so they left
out a few goodies that people with smaller systems (the target group)
wouldn't need. For example, there is no MIDI thru. Neither is there a
local off (you can get around this one if you don't mind playing from
one of the sequencer's virtual synths, but changing patches requires two
hands, or you have to choose your setup by sequence number rather than
patch text string...).
On the positive side, being able to see the available patches IN ENGLISH
(as opposed to numbers) in the display window and picking one by hitting
the corresponding soft button is EXTREMELY nice. Even if I end up
getting a 88-key master keyboard, I will probably still select patches
from the ESQ. I hope other synth makers catch on and do something
similar -- having to choose a patch by number (was "Fat Brass" number 26
or 27...?) is a pain and a half.
marc webster
## Akai X7000
I have a bone to pick with AKAI!!! I love my sampler (X7000), but they
have really pOed me by not only lowering the retail price of the machine,
but also INCLUDING the memory expansion board at no extra cost!!! I bought
the machine when the List was $1695, of course I paid a couple of hundred
less, but not less than the new price, and I got NO expanded memory. Any
one out there do the same thing? Guess I have to spend more $ to get the
memory expansion. Guess thats the breaks in the synth/smplr market eh?
They could offer the memory expansion to me at a greatly reduced price eh?
Guess I could call and ask. I wrote to them before and got a response from
them personally (it was slow but it was a response). But from 1695 to 1399
plus the memex board... oh well. I'd love to hear from some people out there
that have either S612 samples or X7000 samples. Maybe exchange some.... or
chat about experiences.
Is there anyone out there listening??
Mitch Wood
## Ensoniq ESQ-1
## Roland D-50
I am fortunate enough to own a D-50 and ESQ-1. In reference to
the articles posted comparing the two, here are my opinions. The ESQ-1
definitely is advantageous for compositions. The sounds on it are good,
particularly the piano. However, next to the D-50, some sounds tend to
be thin and similar to a toy piano in the midst of the Phiadelphia
Philharmonic. This requires some tweaking to get compatible sounds
between the two. With some work the ESQ-1 can produce excellent sounds
different from those the D-50 is capable of; i.e. no two synths sound
exactly the same and unique sounds can be created on "most" any synth.
The D-50 can create sounds with uncommon breadth, partially due
to the on-board signal processing, of course. The major difference in the
sampled waveforms on the ESQ-1 and the sampled attack portions (and maybe
loops too) on the D-50 is that the ESQ-1 uses the fundamental frequency
of the waveform and the D-50 uses the harmonics, hence more frequency
range in the sounds. Because of this, some waveforms on the ESQ-1
will create a noticeable buzz if used outside of their natural frequency
range. (The high end of some is noisy and sounds like a single frequency
buzz -- very annoying). Again some care in constructing sounds is
required. The D-50 does not appear to have this problem, at least not
to such a great extent.
Overall, the D-50 is one of the most versatile keyboards for
programming sounds and for playability (multiple routing of velocity/
after touch and LFO's, etc.). No multi-timbrality or sequencer as
on the ESQ-1. The best judgement on which to buy depends on your present
needs/wants and personal preference. Just some of my subjective thoughts.
BTW, I am new to the net so forgive any mistakes. Did this reach
anyone?
Dedric Terry
## Roland D-50
In article <113@cunixc.columbia.edu> jte@cunixc.columbia.edu (Jeff Eldredge) writes:
>the D-50, on the other hand, seems to be a product of the disease i
>call SOUND EVENT INFATUATION, an illness which is so prevalent today.
>also called SYNTH PATCH FETISH.
Well, I'm a D-50 owner... and I guess I agree with you! But let's not
condemn the D-50 as a product of "Sound Event Infatuation" outright,
but more as a victim. I found the D-50 factory patches a little much -
like Black Forest Gateau, you know, delightful but rather rich and
sickly in more than small quantities. I certainly wouldn't think of using
any of them for *my* music. But I view factory patches as being there to
show what the instrument is capable of - like the performance figures for
a car. I use the D-50's built-in samples to generate fairly basic acoustic
sounds with a bit of sparkle, and I get ideas/hints from fragments of the
factory patches. And because I keep to fairly simple sounds, I get
to use the machine in separate mode as two distinct 8-voice polysynths.
I bought my D-50 on listening to the factory patches, NOT because they
blew my socks off (although they did) (well, maybe a *little* because they
blew my socks off) but because they patches displayed the machine's
clarity, warmth and versatility. I recall the ESQ-1's factory patches
as being pretty mediocre, making it hard for me to judge the machine's
flexibility and versatility.
By the way, my next synth will be the ESQ-1 rackmount. Why? Well,
because I want another synth (I already have a TX7) with scope for generating
completely new waveforms.
--
Nick Rothwell
## Ensoniq ESQ-1
## Yamaha TX-802
> Has anyone any opinions (price is not a concern), about the relative
advantages of the Ensoniq ESQ-M and the Yamaha TX802? I am looking
for an 8 voice polytimbral polyphonic tone generator and was directed
to one of these.
Both have excellent multimode implmentations, so I would base my
decision mainly on which sound I wanted to add to my system -- the ESQ
sound or the DX sound. I would also consider the D-550 (Roland D-50 in
a rack) and the K5M (Kawai K5 in a rack). Another one I've been
thinking about is the Kurzweil PX1000 (a selection of 250 sounds
including the famous Kurzweil piano in a $2500 rack).
Concerning implmentations, one big advantage of the ESQ is dynamic voice
allocation; one advantage of the DX is 16 voices. The D-550 and K5m
are also 16 voice. The K5m can be either dynamically allocated (like
the ESQ) OR pre-allocated(like the DX) -- hats off to Kawai! The
Kurzweil is a bit more expensive, but it has 24 voices! (I consider this
to be signifcantly more useful than 16 voices -- it allows you to layer
and have 12 composit voices instead of only 8, and I find that 8 voices
only marginally acceptable when playing big 10 finger chords...)
One comment on ESQ sound -- sometimes I find it a little
"mushy"...(maybe it's the particular patches I'm using, maybe it's
personal perference). I usually layer is with a TX81z to add brightness
and percusiveness -- the combination works quite well. I sometimes find
it lacking in creating that super-fat bass throb (I'm not doing much
signal processing, maybe that would help). The D-50 seems capable of a
very broad fat sound so I've been considering adding a D-550 when I save
enough pennies.
marc webster
## Roland MT-32
Yesterday I played with a MT-32, Roland's answer to the FB01
and TX81Z. Some things I thought were great, others not so impressive.
The MT-32 is mentioned briefly in the latest KEYBOARD's NAMM review
(their writer called it "a hot item" -- I won't dispute that!).
This box is a little bigger than an FB01 and holds 128 patches,
some of which are identical to D-50 factory sounds.
It's 8-voice polytimbral, and according to my fave salesman
it can do 4 parts on each of those voices!
Actually, I found it started dropping notes after I built the chord
up to 12 notes, not 32. I was using a ROland MIDI piano's keyboard.
So who's gonna complain about 12 notes at a fraction of an Oberheim?
BTW, the MT-32 handles the whole piano keyboard range and who knows
how much more (the salesman said "the entire MIDI 127-note range").
Choosing patches from the front panel is both ingenious and sloppy.
Two pushbuttons (real buttons, no "motorcycle company" membranes)
select whether a single knob selects banks (rows)
or individual sounds (columns) within each bank.
A plastic cheat-sheet shows all the presets, and the name of each
patch is also displayed on a small but neat lower-case LED readout.
Very nice, but the knob's sensitivity varies a lot so it's hard
to land on a particular patch, and just browsing thru the patches
it's easy to skip a couple even when you're sure you turned the knob
just a bit. I wish Roland had put a pair of up-down buttons
next to the knob for "fine tuning".
Two great features that can save you a lot of $$$ are a built-in
reverb with 5 settings, and a bank of percussion voices for making
your own software drum machine. Each of about 9 to 16 precussion
sounds belongs to a separate "note" around Middle C, so it's easy
to play drums from existing software, sequencers, or
just your keyboard!
I offered to trade my still-in-box
Alesis Microverb on the spot, but my man pointed out that you can't
send outside audio to the internal reverb.
The sounds are mostly pretty good, though maybe not quite a full
D-50 effect, can't say for sure. The organs and pianos are no better
than the Korg DW8000's, tho they are *different* from the Korg's.
Like the FB01, the D-32 can't be programmed from the front panel,
but sys-ex dumps are explained in the manual, so your computer can
become a programmer and/or librarian. With all the support
coming out for the D-50, D-32 software and patches should be
easy to come by.
Price on this little bugger lists at $700.
I expect you guys with access to NJ and NY stores to start
posting the best deal in your neighborhood on this toy.
For the MIDI composer who hardly plays keys but wants a MIDI
orchestra for his computer, it's hard to imagine a better
start-up outfit than this MT-32, the computer, and NOTHING ELSE
but a plain old stereo cassette deck. That $700 includes
reverb and the part of a drumbox that you can't fake in software.
----
Sorry, I left out a few items in yesterday's mini-review
of the Roland MT-32 "MIDI orchestra" box.
The knob that [tries to] access patches can also be selected
to adjust Master Volume (box output), or more important,
the volume of the individual patch you have currently up.
This patch volume becomes permanent (till you tweak it again).
Thus you can go thru and "balance" the individual patches
to fit your gig or your poly-timbral "orchestra" balance.
VERY neat, since the D-32 output all comes out the same
stereo plugs.* Sorta like having a 128-channel mixer inside
with a slider for each patch.
Or think of patch volume as one exception to the rule that you
can't program patches from the front panel.
* Well, maybe the drum sounds have separate output, or maybe
you can get dry sound ahead of the reverb, or ....
I didn't check the back panel.
About the factory voices -- unlike some other (rock-oriented)
sets, they include a good set of classical woodwinds (two clarinets,
oboe, english horn, bassoon). Except for bassoon these were
pretty close. Several saxes, all good.
I didn't have time to try the Strings, too bad.
Pitched percussion (mallet) sounds are good.
As I said, the Brass and Keyboard are OK but nothing special
(does ANY synth under $50K do pianos or brass right???)
Three Pipe Organs, one usable, not much better than my Korg's
but different enough to be welcome in my Studio B[asement].
Novelty sounds like Orchestra Hit and One-Note Jam are terrific
and are obviously sampled.
Unforch'ly I could hear a whistling overtone from the digital
processing on any notes below Middle C or so, on many patches.
You may have to cut the treble or low-pass filter the D-32's
output to get rid of this -- a terrible thing to do to the
new Rolands' crisp, clear sounds. In a complete mixdown you
probably won't notice this anyway, but it seems out of place
on such a good box.
NOISE was nowhere to be found, tho! Is Roland using 16 bits?
Softest patches and decays were totally clean.
I'd like to know just how compatible this box is with the D-50,
whether it has all its capabilities and can borrow patches.
Funny thing, Roland's rack-mount version of D-50 costs lots
more (about the same as keyboard D50), yet lacks the MT-32's
features of polytimbral, drum sounds, & reverb.
So clearly SOMETHING has been left out of the MT-32.
So what? I still think the D-32 is THE bang/buck story of '88.
Disclaimer: I haven't had the time to [stand in line to] tweedle
with a D-50, so I have to ask your help in deciding how closely
related the MT-32 is, what features are added or omitted, etc.
--
Mike J Knudsen
## Casio CZ-series
Hello! Someone asked for differences in the CZ series keyboards
by casio. Here is a listing of major (not all) differences.
All CZ- series keyboards are fully MIDI capable.
CZ-1 Velocity Sensitive 61 key Keyboard with full size keys
192 Preset Voices, 64 programmable
16/8 note polyphonic (depending on complexity of voice)
Tone mixing/ Keyboard Split modes
Cartridge Ports
Pitch Bend/ Modulation Wheels
Stereo Output
No on-board sequencer
CZ-5000 Non-Velocity-Sensitive 61 key Keyboard with full size keys
32 Preset Voices, 32 Programmable
16/8 note polyphonic (depending on complexity of voice)
8-track On-board sequencer, any track can have manual/real time input
Tone mixing/ Keyboard Split / Sequencer modes
Pitch Bend/ Modulation Wheels
Stereo Output
Cartridge Ports
CZ-3000 (CZ-5000 without sequencer)
CZ-2000 (CZ-3000 with speakers, 32 Programmable Voices are preset
from factory, no cartridge input, no modulation wheel)
CZ-1000 (CZ-2000 without speakers, 16 preset &16 programmable voices,
8/4 note polyphonic (depending on complexity of voice)
can be battery driven, , auto-poweroff, only 49 keys)
CZ-101 (CZ-1000 with miniature keys, same number of keys)
CZ-230S (CZ-101 with built-in speaker & 100 presets
PCM rhythm generator (whatever that is)
this one is NOT programmable like the CZ-101)
My personal choice was a used CZ-5000 for $700, the 8-track sequencer is
quite useful, and fun to play with. :-)
David Coleman
## Roland S-50
Saw a demo of the Roland S-50 last week. Killer possibilities
with a sequencer(i.e. the MC-500)!! With 4 midi channels into the S-50
at once (4 patches can be played at once) and multiple sounds per patch
the S-50 becomes a system by itself( for $2800 it should!). New operating
system software updates could make it even more versitile. The rackmount
version, S-550, handles 8 midi ins at once! What one could do with
$4000!!
Dedric Terry
## Roland MT-32
In article <2033@ihwpt.ATT.COM> knudsen@ihwpt.ATT.COM (mike knudsen) writes:
>I'd like to know just how compatible this box is with the D-50,
> ...
>So clearly SOMETHING has been left out of the D-32.
From what I've heard/read, the MT-32 builds its patches directly from
Partials, where the D-50 groups Partials into pairs, calling them Tones.
Therefore, the MT-32 is missing out all the D-50's Tone features, these
being:
2 Chorus units (programmable type, rate, depth, balance)
2 digital equalisers (each with one semi- and one parametric eq)
2 Pitch Envelopes
6 LFO's (!) - the MT-32 *must* have some LFO capability, though...
The D-50 also has more reverb types (and these are programmable, although
Roland don't document the parameter format, curse 'em curse 'em).
And I believe the MT-32 can't handle aftertouch or chase mode.
It's claimed that the MT-32 and D-50 Partial parameters are the same,
and that you can program your MT-32 from your D-50 - but the D-50 can't
(except under computer control) send out data on individual patches, so
I don't really understand this.
All in all, the MT-32 seems like a pretty good deal.
BTW: If ANYBODY knows anything about the D-50's reverb parameters - or
possibly has one of the new ROM cards (with different reverb settings) -
I'd like to know.
Nick Rothwell
## Kurzweil K1000
>> Kurzweil is introducing a stripped version of the K250 called
the
>> K1000. Retail is $2,495. I talked with the local dealer, who'd seen
>> a prototype demonstrated. It's a ROM-based sampled sound with 10
>> basic....
>Hey this doesn't sound bad, although I need a flexible sampler that
>will let me create and edit patches... i.e. I don't mind building my
>own sounds if the machine is up to the task. This machine seems to be
>ROM-oriented. Would I be stuck with what I get in ROM?
As I understand, the sounds ARE the 250 sounds -- Kurzweil basically
stripped out the sequencers and others extras (and subsetted the
selections of samples). This sounds great to those of us who bought our
sequencers, etc a module at a time. The PX1000 has 100 programable
patch locations, so your not exactly "stuck with what I get in ROM". I
haven't been able to figure out everything thats programable, but it
least includes chorusing, layering, splitting, detuning, enveloping (?),
EQing (?). I also very much like the fact that it has 24 voices instead
of the usual 8 or 16.
Just talked to the local Kurzweil dealer -- haven't even got pricing
infomation yet. He expected shipping to begin around the end of the
month (?). Guess I'll call back then.
Question: I've been interested in getting a sampler of some sort, and
have been interested in the Kurzweil because I do a lot of live playing
of Black Gospel, and in this style, things are *very* on the spot -- you
usually don't know what you're playing next until the songs already
started, so you hardly have 30 seconds to "load the right disk" into
your traditional sampler. Having instant access to sounds in ROM seem
attractive in this light. Another possibility is get a hard disk (3
seconds loading time?), but sampler with HD's like the Emax are more
like $3500, and only have 8 voices (yes?). Comments? Suggestions?
marc webster
## Kurzweil K1000
I just heard a factory demo of the Kurzweil K1000XP (I think that is the
correct number). It is the $2500, expander module. Here is the good news:
24 voice, polytimbral (the factory guy implied 16 way polytimbral - because
of the 16 MIDI channels, but he seemed a little confused by the question),
same sounds as in the K250 (that is, uses the same samples and looping
apparently). The bad news: only nine different sounds (128 programmable
variations of those sounds, but only 9 sounds), only 2 outs, all sounds in ROM,
you CAN NOT add new sounds (you can only modify EQ, chorus, etc. of the
existing sounds). Even worse news: three of the sounds are clarinet,
trumpet, and, GET THIS, baritone horn!! The good sounds are piano (sounded
very good but is was hard to tell if it really is as expresive as the MKS20),
choir, ensemble strings, acoustic bass. Not yet implemented was a Hammond
B3. I can't remember the 9th sound, but I don't think it was a great one.
The quality of the sounds was extremely good. The clarinet was fantastic,
but who cares. As an expander I think it is only useful for piano, strings,
bass, B3, and choir (if you need ahs and ohs). THe other sounds are very poor
choices (to me), but may have been chosen for ROM limitation reasons. As far
as sound quality, it was hard to tell if it was as good as the K250. The fact
that the samples are the same doesn't say that the fidelity (bandwidth, number
of bits, etc.) is the same. My impression was that the quality was at least
very close to the K250, and probably as good (but this was very hard to deter-
mine).
They have a very strange way to add sounds. You just spend $2500 for
a completely different module, either the strings module or the guitar module.
Actually, one of these modules is $2000 (only 20 voice), but I can't remember
which. A home version of the K1000XP is planned at $2000. It has more limited
modifications of the sounds, but the same sounds as the K1000XP.
All in all, I was not too impressed. It is very good at what it does,
but the fact that I am stuck with the sounds forever, and the set is a little
limited, doesn't sound good.
One other strange piece of information: They have planned a 88 key
keyboard with the K1000XP guts built in for $2500. I asked if he was right
about the price and he said yes. It's not too often that you get a keyboard
for free! I would not depend on this last piece of info since it is 5-6
months away, and doesn't seem to make sense.
One last rumor, possibly totally bogus! On Oct. Ensonique will
be demoing (at American Music in Seattle) some new stuff. I wasn't aware
that they had any new stuff. I can't be at the demo, but I'll see if I can
get someone to go and I'll write a report if it's interesting.
## Kawai K3
In article <5075@columbia.edu> luke@aspen.UUCP (Luke McCormick) writes:
> requirements: Full Size Keys, Velocity Sensitivity, MIDI, DURABILITY
> Pedal input, < $1000 ... nice but not necessary: Pressure Sensitivity,
> Lots Of Knobs, Built in effects...
The Kawai K3 has a lot of this, and may be expanded to 12 voices via
the K3M rack-mount if 6 isn't enough. The K5 is a killer, but is likely
to run about $1300-$1500, unfortunately. Another route to consider is
the Akai 7000 sampling keyboard; it's around $1000, and with the extra
megabyte of memory it's 16-voice polytimbral. Note that neither of these
comes with tons of knobs; but the menu display on the K5, for instance,
makes it pretty easy to get at everything.
Rich Kulawiec
## Roland MT-32
In article <2605@drivax.UUCP>, macleod@drivax.UUCP (MacLeod) writes:
> What I would like is a box that supports, say, 16 MIDI channels,
> and that has 16 or so >good< sampled orchestral sounds - violins, violas,
> cellos, bass; horn, trombone, trumpet, tuba; clarinet, oboe, bassoon, baritone
> sax; flute, tympani, piano, mixed choir - some mix like that. All I want
> to do in this particular context is to score music for your classic orchestra
> on my MIDI computer and hear it played back in real time with a high degree
> of realism. I don't think that it would be too much to ask of current
> technology; in fact, I suspect that such a box could be marketed for jtn@potomac.UUCP (John T. Nelson) writes:
>Here is a summary of my current adventures in looking for a sampling
synthesiser:
Two machines not described in the original article are discussed herein.
Korg DSS-1: Sampler and synth in one box; the samples are used to drive
the synthesizer electronics chain just simple oscillators are used in
most synths, so natural sounds can have very interesting operations performed
on them. Extensive editing of sounds is possible; you can edit a single
waveform down to 1/512 if you're really a fanatic. Waveforms can be joined,
mixed, reversed, looped, cross-faded, all kinds of stuff. 5-octave velocity
and aftertouch keyboard, two built-in digital delays, 8-voices (two
"oscillators" per voice), up to 16 samples in memory at once. Around $1900;
also, a rack-mount version, the DSM-1, with four times the memory, goes
for around $2300. Oh...12-bit samples, 3.5-in disks.
Akai X7000: (Now sold with ASK70 memory expander as standard equipment in
most places.) 12-bit sampler, holds up to 16 at once. Allows 16 split
points; 6-voice machine. Moderate sample-editing capabilities; does a
pretty nice job of autolooping. Includes LFO and partial amplitude envelope
control for tailoring sounds; can store 32 "programs" which consist of
samples + information on split points, LFO settings, tranpositions,
tuning, and so on, on one set of 8 disks. Loading a disk takes 7 seconds;
thus, you can completely reconfigure this thing in about a minute.
Can use samples from the S612 library. 5-octave velocity keyboard;
uses 2.8 disks. Goes for around $1100; the rackmount (I think it's
called the X700) is around $850.
Personally, of the low-end machines, I think the X7000 is the best buy;
it beats the heck out of the Roland S-10 for not much more money. Another
way that I look at it: to get a substantial improvement in the features
of the X7000, you probably have to go all the way to the DSS-1, which
is a pretty healthy chunk of change more. Anyway, I just bought an
X7000 after spending several hours fiddling with it and the DSS-1, and
I'm pretty happy with it; as a first sampler, I think it'll serve just
fine. Down the road, though, a DSM-1 might be in my future; I heard
a demo and it's a killer. This thing has enough memory to hold all
the samples for a whole night's work at once.
Rich Kulawiec
--
Glenn Bruns
MCC, Software Technology Program
arpa: bruns@mcc.com
uucp: {seismo,harvard,gatech,pyramid}!ut-sally!im4u!milano!bruns
Article 1790 of rec.music.synth:
Path: ulowell!dandelion!necntc!husc6!cmcl2!rna!dan
From: dan@rna.UUCP (Dan Ts'o)
Newsgroups: rec.music.synth
Subject: Re: synth summary #2 (long)
Message-ID: <674@rna.UUCP>
Date: 12 Nov 87 19:34:11 GMT
References: <5564@milano.UUCP>
Organization: Rockefeller Neurobiology
Lines: 9
> ## Korg SG-1D Digital Piano
>
> INSTRUMENT:
> 88 keys. 75? pounds. List price $2195?, and I paid $1600.
> Digitally sampled sound.
There is a new SGX-1D which cost $200 more and has 4X the memory for
the samples. I haven't heard it myself but everyone says it is a tremendous
improvement. Upgrade from the old SG-1D cost $200 and are available now.